POPULARITY
Categories
Stürz, Franziska www.deutschlandfunk.de, Kultur heute
The Wrap with Chris Whalen is back after a summer vacation with a blunt read on the fall ahead: affordability — fuel, housing, food — has already decided the midterms, and the Iran conflict plus the Russia-Ukraine war have created a shortage not just of crude but of refined products, with refinery maintenance season and the shift to heating oil set to push prices higher still. He calls $100 oil and a 5% 10-year Treasury the new normal, argues Scott Bessent's buyback strategy has failed, and expects a quarter-point hike next week while raising the more unsettling question: what happens if the Fed raises short rates and the long end goes up anyway? On gold, Whalen is still accumulating, sees $6,000–$7,000 only after a fiscal catalyst like a bad Treasury auction, and points to Shanghai's gold-linked clearing system and Russia's 100-ton sale to China as evidence of where physical demand really lives. He also answers viewer questions on the exodus at Fannie Mae, the flawed data behind credit scores, how to actually save in gold, why he owns only Flagstar and Schwab, and warns that Florida's home price correction is coming for the rest of the country next year.Thank you to our sponsor, Monetary Metals. Learn more at https://www.monetary-metals.com/THEWRAP/Links: The Institutional Risk Analyst: https://www.theinstitutionalriskanalyst.com/ Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/rcwhalen Seeing Around Corners book: https://www.theinstitutionalriskanalyst.com/product-page/seeing-around-corners-achieving-success-in-business-and-life-hardcoverUse the code TheWrap2026 for 25% off your first year of The Institutional Risk Analyst https://www.theinstitutionalriskanalyst.com/plans-pricingTimestamps:0:00 – Welcome back: summer's over, a lot to catch up on0:50 – Energy prices and the midterms: decided at the pump?1:13 – Affordability is the story: diesel, heating oil, Europe's supply crisis2:51 – The $5,000 "Trump dividend" and buying votes4:13 – What nobody in Washington will say about insolvency5:00 – FDICIA, continuing resolutions, and a Congress that can't say no6:34 – Oil near $100: does it get worse from here?7:33 – Rates "going back to normal" after 15 years of Fed subsidy9:24 – Calling 5% on the 10-year — and Bessent's failed buyback strategy10:29 – Warsh rules out QE, spreads tighten anyway11:57 – Why banks are suddenly buying multifamily12:58 – Is 5% a stop along the way or the destination?14:31 – What Chris expects from the Fed next week15:06 – The big question: what if the Fed has lost the long end?16:11 – What losing control of long rates would actually signal17:24 – Gold with David Kotok, and why it's not a trading vehicle18:28 – Tom McClellan on the oil–gold relationship (with a 16-month lag)20:09 – A quiet year: banks, AI trade, and boring winners21:17 – What takes gold from $4–5K to $6–7K22:00 – Russia sells 100 tons of gold to China22:53 – Is the dollar really in decline? CIPS, Shanghai, and sanctions24:12 – How high can diesel and Brent go this winter?25:30 – Iran, the Houthis, and the Red Sea26:59 – Viewer Q: What's happening inside Fannie Mae?28:30 – Pulte, VantageScore, and the bad-data problem in credit scoring29:39 – Viewer Q: How do you actually save in gold?30:45 – Florida home prices are falling — "Misery on the Eights"31:31 – Viewer Q: The big money center banks32:47 – Viewer Q: Book recommendations and the gold book33:23 – Closing thoughts: an age of instability
Stacey opens this episode with a hot take before Frank even gets a word in.Frank breaks down a comment made online by Cheryl Penny, founder and CEO of Dynasty Financial Partners, who argued that a financial advisor is only truly independent if they own their own RIA. Frank explains why he disagrees, using real examples of RIAs having their custodial agreements pulled by firms like Schwab and Raymond James, proving that ownership alone does not remove risk or outside control.Stacey pushes back on the idea of captive independence, pointing out that advisors at firms like LPL or Centera are not captive at all, they own their clients and their data and they can leave whenever they want. Frank walks through the real math behind a transition deal to show why taking a check from a firm does not trap an advisor either, since the note can simply be paid back.Stacey introduces what she jokes she should trademark, the spectrum of independence, the idea that independence is not binary but exists on a range from heavily branded wirehouse structures to fully self built RIAs, with plenty of legitimate options in between. Frank adds a real client example of an advisor who has stayed an IAR of an RIA for years because building his own simply is not worth the time and energy and explains how firms like Dynasty help advisors avoid reinventing the wheel with technology and pricing.The conversation turns pointed when Frank and Stacey discuss financial advisors being quietly penalized for keeping smaller clients as their book grows and whether that pressure from a firm should count against how independent an advisor really is. The episode closes with Stacey's real test for independence, if you cannot pick up and leave without restrictions, ask yourself how independent you actually are. Questions answered in this episode include:Is a financial advisor only truly independent if they own their own RIA?What is captive independence and is it a real risk for advisors?What is the spectrum of independence?How does a financial advisor transition deal actually work if you want to leave early?Why do some financial advisors stay as an IAR instead of building their own RIA?Should financial advisors be penalized for keeping smaller clients?What is the real test of whether a financial advisor is independent? Chapters:00:00 Introduction: You're Not as Independent as You Think 01:55 The Comment That Started the Debate 03:19 Layers of Termination and What True Independence Means 04:21 Captive Independence: Is It Real 09:38 The Spectrum of Independence 13:12 Finding the Right RIA Fit Without Reinventing the Wheel 16:23 Is Your Firm Punishing You for Smaller Clients 21:02 How to Reach Frank and Stacey Resources:- Elite Consulting Partners: https://eliteconsultingpartners.com- Elite Marketing Concepts: https://elitemarketingconcepts.com- Elite Advisor Successions: https://eliteadvisorsuccessions.com- JEDI Database Solutions: https://jedidatabasesolutions.com- Elite Wealth Management Insights Report: https://eliteconsultingpartners.com/insight-report- Listen to more: https://eliteconsultingpartners.com/podcasts/- LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/elite-consulting-partners/
I am the House! Bessent on Yen and other matters (he has inside information). Straight of Hormuz – There is no movement people. CPI coming Friday – many say ultimate Fed test. Gen-Z Dumps the bubbles. PLUS we are now on Spotify and Amazon Music/Podcasts! Click HERE for Show Notes and Links DHUnplugged is now streaming live - with listener chat. Click on link on the right sidebar. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? PayPal.Donation.Button({ env:'production', hosted_button_id:'JJJHP2GDEJC7J', image: { src:'https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif', alt:'Donate with PayPal button', title:'PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!', } }).render('#donate-button'); Follow John S. Dvorak on X Follow Andrew Horowitz on X Warm-Up - I am the House! Bessent tonight on Yen and other matters (he has inside information) - Straight of Hormuz - There is no movement people - CPI coming Friday - many say ultimate Fed test - Gen-Z Dumps the bubbles Markets - Chips up, making up for some time - Oil UP! and UP! - Yields keep climbing DHU MAILING LIST! - Go to DHUnplugged.com BOND YIELDS KEEP CLIMBING - Japan now has a 3% 10-year yield while carrying government debt above 200% of GDP. - Higher Japanese yields also create an incentive for domestic investors to bring money home rather than reaching overseas for returns. - The broader bond selloff is hitting the U.S., Germany, U.K. and Japan at the same time. FED HIKE ODDS RISE - Warsh said the Fed still has “work to do” if officials are not confident inflation is returning to 2%. - Fed Governor Christopher Waller has left open the possibility of holding rates steady if inflation cools. - The September decision is increasingly being dictated by incoming inflation data and oil. - It is kinda funny.... The “data-dependent Fed” is now apparently oil-dependent, jobs-dependent and whatever-CPI-says-next-week-dependent. OIL KEEPS PRESSURE ON INFLATION - Renewed U.S.-Iran tensions have pushed oil higher and revived fears about supply through the Strait of Hormuz. - The Strait remains one of the most important chokepoints for global energy flows. - Oil is working directly against central banks trying to bring inflation back toward target. - Basically, central banks can raise rates all they want yet it is too bad that the the Strait of Hormuz does not attend FOMC meetings. SCHWAB VOLATILITY TRADE - Barron's argues low market volatility may not last as fall seasonality and macro risks build. - Schwab could benefit if volatility drives heavier customer trading activity. - The suggested trade used an October risk reversal built around $110 puts and $120 calls. BEAR INVASION - Colorado has logged more than 7,000 bear sightings this year, already a record. - Drought and poor natural food supplies are pushing bears into homes and businesses. - New Mexico and Utah have also reported unusually high numbers of bears being euthanized. - One Colorado homeowner found two bears inside his hallway; another wandered into a vape shop. - Is this a warning for markets????? META SETTLEMENT - Meta agreed to pay up to $18 billion over 10 years to settle state claims involving harm to children. - States had been seeking penalties approaching $200 billion. - Teen accounts will face time limits, overnight restrictions and muted school-hour notifications. - Meta did not have to eliminate personalized recommendations or targeted advertising. BROADCOM: NEXT AI CHECK - Broadcom reports Wednesday after the close, another major test of AI spending after Nvidia. - Focus will be on AI semiconductor growth, hyperscaler demand and the outlook for custom AI accelerators. - Broadcom's guidance matters beyond the stock because it offers a read on whether huge data-center spending plans are still accelerating. WEIRD ONE: SHEIN'S UPSIDE-DOWN IPO - Shein is looking to raise about $1.8 billion in its Hong Kong IPO while paying roughly $3.6 billion in cash and stock to early investors. - The payouts stem from investor protections triggered after Shein's valuation collapsed from about $98 billion in 2022 to roughly $26.8 billion. - Some of the same early investors receiving compensation are coming back as cornerstone buyers in the IPO. - Essentially: raise $1.8 billion from new investors while sending twice that amount back to older ones. GOOD GOOD GOES BAD - Good Good Golf's controversial Callaway ad showed co-founder Garrett Clark shoving a female creator in a movie spoof, triggering immediate backlash. - Callaway ended its partnership, Dick's and Golf Galaxy pulled Good Good merchandise, and Golf Channel canceled the current "Big Break x Good Good" season. - Good Good also stepped away as title sponsor of the PGA Tour's November event in Austin. - WOW - the company had more than 2 million YouTube followers and become one of golf's fastest-growing media and merchandise businesses before the blowup. ARGENTINA BEEF PRICE FIX - Trump expanded lower-tariff beef imports by 300,000 metric tons in an effort to bring down record-high U.S. beef prices. - The U.S. cattle herd is at its lowest level in 75 years, while USDA expects beef production to fall roughly 4% this year. - Argentina is one source of additional supply, but U.S. ranchers argue cheaper imports could undercut domestic producers just as they are trying to rebuild herds. - Trump says imported beef could help lower prices; farm-state lawmakers and ranch groups say the short-term consumer fix could make the long-term supply problem worse. EUROPE GETS GROWTH AND INFLATION - Euro-zone manufacturing is expanding at its fastest pace in more than four years as headline inflation moves back above 3%. - Stronger factories give the ECB more room to tighten without immediately crushing economic activity. - Much of the new inflation pressure is energy-driven, which higher ECB rates cannot directly fix. - Europe finally gets better manufacturing numbers, so naturally the reward is another rate hike. CHINA'S TWO-SPEED ECONOMY - The private manufacturing PMI showed expansion while the official factory reading remained in contraction. - Export orders strengthened, but services and domestic demand remain weak. - The divergence shows the improvement remains concentrated in exporters. - Alternative Facts: Depending on which PMI you prefer, China's factory sector is either expanding or contracting. Two economies for the price of one. THE $50 BILLION DATA-CENTER IPO - SB Energy is reportedly seeking a valuation above $50 billion despite having no operational data centers. - It reported about $139 million of first-half revenue against a $3.21 billion net loss. - The company claims roughly $439 billion of project backlog. - OpenAI is an investor, warrant holder and major future customer; Nvidia is also providing capital while supplying the chips. - Soooooo...... No operating data centers, billions in losses and a possible $50 billion valuation. At least they remembered to build the valuation first. NVIDIA BUYS HUGGING FACE FOR $13 BILLION - Nvidia agreed to buy Hugging Face for about $12.9 billion. - Hugging Face was valued at $4.5 billion in 2023 and has about $150 million in annual revenue. - Nvidia will pay roughly $11.9 billion to shareholders plus $1 billion in employee retention equity. - Hugging Face will remain open and interoperable. - JC Called this earlier last week. Obviusly the pressure was on since his scoop and they needed to get this done. UNCLE SAM'S STOCK PORTFOLIO - Federal equity positions now include Intel, MP Materials and Trilogy Metals. - Intel, MP Materials and Trilogy Metals all jumped after their respective government deals. - An Intel shareholder lawsuit argues the CHIPS Act did not authorize the government to demand an equity stake. - The case could affect other government investments made using CHIPS Act funding. GEN Z DUMPS THE BUBBLES - Non-carbonated drinks accounted for 38% of new premixed-alcohol launches last year, up from 27% in 2021. - Boston Beer's Sun Cruiser is growing while Truly slows. - Mom Water is on pace to exceed 1 million cases this year. - Lucky One Lemonade sold 1 million cases in its first seven months. - Gen Z has apparently decided carbonation was the problem. TRUMP WANTS LOWER RATES - President Trump called for lower interest rates after the August jobs report. - Markets moved the other way, increasing expectations for a September Fed hike. - Kevin Warsh has kept another rate increase on the table. - Markets were pricing roughly a 60%-plus chance of a quarter-point September hike. JOBS REPORT CRUSHES ESTIMATES - August payrolls rose 162,000 versus roughly 56,000 expected. - July was revised from a 23,000 decline to a 21,000 gain. - Unemployment held at 4.1%. - Labor-force participation rose to 61.6%. - Wage growth eased to 3.1% year over year. MAPQUEST IS NO. 1 AGAIN - MapQuest jumped from No. 128 to No. 1 in the U.S. App Store. - The surge followed its decision to keep the Lake Ontario name. - More than half of its 2026 U.S. downloads reportedly came in just a few days. - Google Maps now shows “Lake America” for U.S. users. AUSTRALIA JOINS THE BOND SELLOFF - Australia's 10-year government bond yield climbed above 5.1%, its highest since 2011. - The three-year yield also jumped as traders priced more central-bank tightening. - Australia joins the U.S., Japan, Germany and U.K. in the global yield surge. DICK'S GETS HIT BY FOOTWEAR - Dick's shares fell more than 25% after earnings. - Earnings, revenue and same-store sales missed expectations. - Foot Locker also disappointed after the acquisition. - Management cited heavier promotions, fewer product launches and discounting of older shoes. Love the Show? Then how about a Donation? PayPal.Donation.Button({ env: 'production', hosted_button_id: 'JJJHP2GDEJC7J', image: { src: 'https://www.paypalobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif', alt: 'Donate with PayPal button', title: 'PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!' } }).render('#donate-button-2'); THE CLOSEST TO THE PIN for SpaceX (SPCX) Winners will be getting great stuff like the new "OFFICIAL" DHUnplugged Shirt! FED AND CRYPTO LIMERICKS See this week's stock picks HERE Follow John C. Dvorak on Twitter Follow Andrew Horowitz on Twitter
After a surprisingly firm August jobs report Friday that sent stocks down on rate hike fears, the market returns from a holiday weekend awaiting CPI data and Treasury auctions.Important DisclosuresThis material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions.All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed.For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve.Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment.Past performance is no guarantee of future results.Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request.Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets.Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions.The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party.Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors.Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument.Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here.Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research.The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC.Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB.(0130-0926) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Let us know your thoughts. Send us a Text Message. Follow me to see #HeadsTalk Podcast Audiograms every Monday on LinkedInEpisode Title:
Welche Kartenkombination führt unfehlbar zum Gewinn, zum Spielglück? Pjotr Tschaikowskis Oper "Pique Dame" weiß darauf die Antwort, und weiß auch, dass das Glück der Karten nicht gleich das Glück im Leben bedeutet. "Pique Dame" wird die neue Opernsaison in Hannover eröffnen, unter der Regie von Roland Schwab. Als Opernregisseur hat Roland Schwab international einen Namen, hat seinerzeit bei Götz Friedrich in Hamburg studiert, war Assistent bei Harry Kupfer und Ruth Berghaus. Ob er aber nun in Berlin, München, Köln oder an anderen renommierten Häusern inszeniert, die Arbeiten von Roland Schwab sorgen für Aufmerksamkeit. Wagners "Lohengrin" brachte er beispielsweise in der Salzburger Felsenreitschule mit einem Flugzeugwrack auf die Bühne, eine Art Katastrophenstück. Den "Rosenkavalier" von Richard Strauss versetzte er ins Weltall. 2022 sorgte er bei den Bayreuther Festspielen mit "Tristan und Isolde" für Jubel, trotz nur weniger Wochen Vorbereitungszeit.Bevor jetzt "Pique Dame" in Hannover Premiere feiert, ist Roland Schwab zu Gast bei NDR Kultur la carte und spricht mit Friederike Westerhaus über die Vorbereitung, die Grundstimmung und seine unterschiedlichen Regiearbeiten.
Thursday's rebound faces a test today from nonfarm payrolls data. Jobs growth is expected to be 45,000 in August, and rate hike odds were 50-50 going into the 8:30 a.m. ET report.Important DisclosuresThis material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The {securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for his or her own particular situation before making any investment decisions.For illustrative purpose(s) only.Investing involves risk, including loss of principal, and for some products and strategies, loss of more than your initial investment.Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request.Past performance is no guarantee of future results.Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets.Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions.The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party.Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument.Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here.Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors.All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market, economic or political conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed.Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research.The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC.Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB.(0130-0926) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Broadcom earnings late yesterday beat expectations but shares initially dipped. Investors await today's initial jobless claims and tomorrow's critical nonfarm payrolls data. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0130-0926) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Director Chris Schwab joins Nasty Neal to discuss his haunting new horror film, DRACULA: THE NIGHT AROUND US, following its screening at FrightFest.A disillusioned doctor begins to regain his faith in humanity after forming a connection with a mother and daughter. But their fragile hope is threatened when they are hunted by an evil force that thrives on destruction.Chris Schwab discusses reimagining Dracula, the film's themes of faith and humanity, creating its sinister atmosphere, working with the cast, and bringing the movie to FrightFest.Subscribe to Without Your Head Horror Podcast for more filmmaker interviews, independent horror, festival coverage, reviews, and genre news!Join this channel to get access to perks:https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOmwH7xVAhD-OOAqFWyTYTA/join#DraculaTheNightAroundUs #ChrisSchwab #FrightFest #Dracula #HorrorMovie #HorrorInterview #IndieHorror #WithoutYourHead
After yesterday's tech sell-off sparked by rising oil and yields after fresh U.S. strikes on Iran, investors digest results from Dell and Palo Alto Networks and await Broadcom. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0130-0926) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
What does it really take to turn an idea into an independent movie?For filmmakers Sarah T. Schwab and Brian Long, the answer involves years of persistence, fundraising, creative risk, trusted collaborators, a willingness to hear “no” and, occasionally, getting very close to a tarantula.On this episode of HarmonyTALK, host Lisa Champeau sits down with the co-founders of Cardinal Flix, the independent production company behind Life After You, A Stage of Twilight and Crybaby Bridge, for a candid look at what happens long before a movie reaches the screen.Schwab and Long talk about launching Cardinal Flix during the pandemic, raising money for independent films, attracting accomplished actors, surviving high-pressure shoots and discovering that sometimes the only way forward is to stop waiting for someone else to open the door.They also take us inside Arachnophilia, Schwab's new psychological thriller inspired in part by her own lifelong fear of spiders. The film is preparing to shoot in Scranton and Northeastern Pennsylvania, where Cardinal Flix sees the potential for something much bigger than a single production.For Schwab and Long, independent filmmaking is equal parts storytelling, entrepreneurship and leap of faith. Their journey offers a revealing look at what it takes to spin an idea into a movie, and why they believe NEPA could become an important part of what comes next.
After the week began with oil surging on new violence in the Middle East and yields up, investors await July job openings data and earnings later from Dell and Palo Alto Networks. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0130-0926) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Derek Moore and Shane Skinner dig into what history says about September in a midterm election year, and why Mike Santoli argues investors should be on high alert heading into the month. Plus, a long look at federal receipts versus federal outlays as a percent of GDP and what top tax rates did and did not do to revenue, the widening spread between mega cap winners and losers in 2026, and a forward earnings check on Nvidia, Alphabet, Apple, Tesla, Costco, and the S&P 500 itself. All that and more this week. S&P 500 September performance in midterm election years going back to 1928. September is historically the weakest month, but midterm years have their own pattern. Mike Santoli argues investors should be on high alert heading into September. What being on high alert actually means for someone already invested and hedged. Federal receipts and federal net outlays as a percent of GDP going back to the 1930s. Outlays keep running above receipts, and that gap is where the deficit comes from. The top individual income tax bracket has fallen from over 90% since the 1940s. Higher top tax rates have not reliably produced higher receipts as a share of GDP. Schwab data ranks 2026 performance and index contribution across the mega caps. Micron leads the group up 226.8% while Tesla is down 22.5% as of August 28, 2026. Apple at 17.6%, Nvidia at 16.6%, and Amazon at 15.4% beat the Nasdaq's 13.6%. Meta is down 12.4% and sits near the bottom on contribution to the S&P 500. Nvidia trades near 17 times forward earnings on estimates of $12.83 a share. Alphabet sits near 19 times forward earnings versus Apple at over 33 times. Tesla's forward P/E is above 180 while Costco holds near 41 times. The S&P 500 near 7,689 on forward earnings estimates of about $394 a share. That works out to roughly 19.4 times forward earnings for the index. SpaceX vs Tesla forward price to earnings ratio Are index level multiples reasonable when the leadership is this uneven? Mentioned in this Episode Santoli: Why investors should be on high alert heading into September https://www.cnbc.com/2026/08/31/santoli-why-investors-should-be-on-high-alert-heading-into-september.html Derek Moore's book Broken Pie Chart https://amzn.to/3S8ADNT Jay Pestrichelli's book Buy and Hedge https://amzn.to/3jQYgMt Derek's book on public speaking Effortless Public Speaking https://amzn.to/3hL1Mag Contact Derek derek.moore@zegainvestments.com
Your year-end plan is actively insulting a segment of your donor file. It's September and that plan is nearly locked, so let's fix it before it goes out.When I was a baby ED, we'd get a $7,500 check from Schwab Charitable in December and I'd code it to Schwab. Not to Susan, who actually made the gift. In my file, Susan looked like she'd bought a gala ticket. She was a major donor and I never once treated her like one, because I didn't know what a DAF was and neither did the person doing my data entry. You probably have Susans right now, sitting in your database dressed up as corporations.Here's what most fundraisers miss: a DAF donor already took her tax deduction the day the money went into the fund. February and December are the same day to her. So every countdown clock and midnight-tonight email you send that segment is factually wrong, and she knows it. It makes you look like an amateur.In this episode I give you the CRM screen to run this week, the four behavioral signals that flag someone holding a DAF who's never given you one, and why I'd rather run this play in January. Everyone decided December was the Super Bowl. January is the empty field. Keep your annual fund calendar exactly as it is, your major gift calendar is a different animal.Important Links:My Big Ask Gifts ProgramMy Book, Get That Money HoneyMy NewsletterJoin the Free Webinar
Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh left the market anxious Friday about possible rate hikes, with odds for a September hike up sharply. Jobs data this week could help shape the decision.Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
This week on Five Question Friday (FQF):Question 1: Has AI fundamentally changed the stock market, and does market history still matter?Question 2: If you retire a few years before claiming Social Security, how does the 4% rule apply during that gap?Question 3: If you roll a long-held Roth 401(k) into a brand-new Roth IRA, do you still have to wait five years to withdraw earnings?Question 4: Can you use traditional IRA funds to pay for long-term care and deduct the cost?Question 5: Can you build a fixed 50/50 portfolio by splitting money between Vanguard's 40/60 and 60/40 LifeStrategy funds?Resources mentioned in the episode:Schwab on the Roth 5-year rules: https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/wh...IRS Publication 502 (Medical and Dental Expenses): https://www.irs.gov/publications/p502Vanguard LifeStrategy Funds: https://investor.vanguard.com/investm...Boldin (retirement planner): https://go.robberger.com/boldin/yt-fq...ProjectionLab: https://go.robberger.com/projectionla...Join the Newsletter. It's Free:https://robberger.com/newsletter/?utm...
This episode of On Investing looks at a market environment increasingly shaped by persistent inflation, rising long-term Treasury yields, fiscal concerns, and renewed trade tensions. Liz Ann Sonders and Collin Martin begin by discussing the latest inflation data, which continues to show price pressures well above the Federal Reserve's 2% target. While wage growth is not driving inflation, they highlight several other forces keeping inflation elevated, including energy prices, tariffs, and the massive investment required to support the AI boom. The conversation then turns to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent's efforts to influence long-term interest rates after yields surged. Collin argues that Bessent's actions are understandable given concerns about mortgage rates and borrowing costs, but he views them as a short-term response to a much deeper issue: the nation's growing debt burden and ongoing fiscal deficits. Both hosts suggest that attempts to manage yields address the symptoms rather than the underlying causes. They also explore the potential tension this creates with the Federal Reserve, which may prefer tighter financial conditions to combat inflation. The episode closes with a look ahead to the Fed's Jackson Hole conference, upcoming labor market reports, purchasing manager surveys, and other economic data that could shape expectations for both growth and Fed policy. You can read the report Liz Ann mentions here: "Great Moderation Era: Drift(ing) Away." On Investing is an original podcast from Charles Schwab. For more on the show, visit schwab.com/OnInvesting. If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating or review on Apple Podcasts. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for his or her own particular situation before making any investment decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market, economic or political conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal. Diversification and asset allocation strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Performance may be affected by risks associated with non-diversification, including investments in specific countries or sectors. Additional risks may also include, but are not limited to, investments in foreign securities, especially emerging markets, real estate investment trusts (REITs), fixed income, municipal securities including state specific municipal securities, small capitalization securities and commodities. Each individual investor should consider these risks carefully before investing in a particular security or strategy. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Investing in alternative investments is speculative, not suitable for all clients, and generally intended for experienced and sophisticated investors who are willing and able to bear the high economic risks of the investment. Investors should obtain and carefully read the related prospectus or offering memorandum, which will contain the information needed to help evaluate the potential investment and provide important disclosures regarding risks, fees and expenses. Commodity-related products carry a high level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Commodity-related products may be extremely volatile, may be illiquid, and can be significantly affected by underlying commodity prices, world events, import controls, worldwide competition, government regulations, and economic conditions. All names and market data shown are for illustrative purposes only and are not a recommendation, offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. Forecasts contained herein are for illustrative purposes only, may be based upon proprietary research and are developed through analysis of historical public data. The policy analysis provided by Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see Schwab.com/IndexDefinitions Negative correlation refers to investments that tend to move in opposite directions: when one rises, the other falls. (0826-1AXY) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
The 10 a.m. ET speech today by Fed Chair Kevin Warsh is likely the day's biggest news, coming a day after technology stocks drove indexes higher. Crude and yields crept up, too. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
What happens when one of investing's original disruptors buys one of the industry's newest disruptors? Barry Ritholtz thinks investors may be the biggest winners and Bill and Jackie dig into why. This special breaking-news is an excerpt from an upcoming Catching Up to FI episode, recorded on 8/26/26. Barry reacts to Vanguard's newly announced agreement to acquire Altruist, the fast-growing technology and custody platform built for independent financial advisors. Barry also gives an important disclosure: he's an Altruist investor, so yes, he has a dog in this fight. From there, he explains why combining Vanguard's enormous scale with Altruist's technology could quickly reshape the custody business, put fresh pressure on Fidelity and Schwab, and potentially extend the famous "Vanguard Effect" into another corner of financial services. Bill calls it "disruptor squared." Barry sees an industry that never stands still. And if competition drives prices lower again, investors may ultimately be the ones cashing the biggest check. This episode covers Barry's immediate reaction to Vanguard's agreement to acquire Altruist His disclosure that he is an Altruist investor and financially benefits from the deal Why Altruist's clean-sheet technology made it an attractive challenger to legacy custodians How Vanguard's scale could immediately change Altruist's competitive position Why Fidelity and Schwab may suddenly have a much larger third competitor The "Vanguard Effect" and how competition can push fees lower across an industry Why Barry believes investors could be the biggest winners from the acquisition How Schwab and Robinhood previously disrupted investing through lower-cost and free trading Why Vanguard was a logical potential acquirer given its earlier relationship with Altruist Barry's larger lesson that financial technology never stands still The Full Episode with Barry Ritholtz will be coming out soon! Be sure to follow the show or subscribe to the channel on YouTube, so you don't miss it!" === SUPPORT THE SHOW ===
Mindy Diamond on Independence: A Podcast for Financial Advisors Considering Change
With Louis Diamond Vanguard's acquisition of Altruist could reshape RIA custody, bringing together Altruist's technology with the scale, capital, and reputation of one of the industry's best-known brands. In Summary Vanguard's acquisition of Altruist brings one of the financial industry's most established brands together with one of RIA custody's fastest-growing challengers. In this Rapid Reaction Industry Update, Louis Diamond looks beyond the reported $4B+ purchase price to consider what the combination could mean for advisors—what he sees as the good news, the potentially negative outcomes, and everything in between. Altruist gains the capital, scale, and brand recognition that could help it compete more aggressively for larger RIAs and breakaway teams. Vanguard gains a technology-forward custody platform and greater access to the independent advisor channel. The larger implication may be increased competition across RIA custody. With Schwab and Fidelity controlling much of the market, a Vanguard-backed Altruist could create new pressure around technology, pricing, service, referrals, and innovation—while raising new questions about how Vanguard balances its growing advice business with its role as custodian. The Storyline RIA custody has long been dominated by Schwab and Fidelity, particularly since Schwab's acquisition of TD Ameritrade. Altruist emerged as one of the few credible challengers, building its position around modern technology, lower costs, and an advisor-focused platform. But technology was only part of the equation. For larger breakaway teams in particular, Altruist faced another hurdle: brand recognition. Advisors could be impressed by the platform while still wondering how clients accustomed to names like Merrill, UBS, Morgan Stanley, Schwab, or Fidelity would respond to an unfamiliar custodian. Vanguard changes that equation. Louis examines why the acquisition makes strategic sense for both companies, from Vanguard's push to expand access to financial advice to Altruist's opportunity to operate with the backing of a well-capitalized, long-term owner. For advisors, however, the bigger story is what happens next. A stronger competitor in custody could affect everything from technology and pricing to referral opportunities and the choices available to breakaway advisors. There are also important questions still unanswered. Vanguard operates its own advice businesses. Altruist's speed and fintech culture may be tested inside a much larger organization. And while Vanguard says Altruist will remain independent, the longer-term operating model remains to be seen. The deal may not change advisors' options immediately. But it has the potential to change the competitive dynamics surrounding those options considerably. Topics Covered Vanguard's acquisition of Altruist RIA custody competition Schwab and Fidelity Altruist's technology and Hazel AI Vanguard's financial advice strategy Custodian brand recognition for breakaway advisors Advisor referral networks Custody and technology pricing Direct advice and custodian conflicts The future of RIA platforms and Supportive Independence > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why is the Vanguard-Altruist acquisition significant for RIA custody? (03:53)Louis explains why custody has remained highly concentrated around Schwab and Fidelity and how combining Vanguard's scale and reputation with Altruist's technology could create a much stronger third competitor. What problem does Vanguard potentially solve for Altruist? (05:01)Altruist has built a strong reputation among advisors for its technology, but larger breakaway teams have sometimes questioned whether clients would recognize or trust the brand. Vanguard could significantly reduce that concern. Why does buying Altruist make sense for Vanguard? (07:00)Vanguard has more than 50 million investors and has publicly discussed the need to expand access to financial advice. Louis considers how Altruist could give Vanguard both additional capacity and a stronger connection to independent advisors. What does Altruist gain from Vanguard beyond capital? (09:51)Louis discusses the significance of having a long-term, investor-owned parent rather than remaining dependent on successive rounds of venture capital, while gaining additional resources to develop custody, technology, and Hazel AI. How could this acquisition change the choices available to breakaway advisors? (12:33)The combination of Altruist's technology with Vanguard's brand could make the platform more viable for larger teams that previously hesitated because of client recognition and trust concerns. Could Vanguard become a meaningful source of client referrals to RIAs? (13:42)With millions of existing investors and more demand for advice than Vanguard can necessarily serve internally, Louis considers whether a future referral program connecting Vanguard clients with Altruist RIAs could become an important competitive advantage. What are the potential risks of the Vanguard-Altruist combination? (16:54)The acquisition also raises questions around Vanguard's competing advice business, Altruist's long-term independence, differences in corporate culture, innovation speed, and talent retention. What could happen next across the custody market? (20:00)Louis offers several predictions, including responses from Schwab and Fidelity, wider adoption of Hazel AI, a potential Vanguard-Altruist referral channel, and greater use of Altruist by breakaway advisors. Key Takeaways Vanguard's acquisition of Altruist could introduce a more formidable competitor into an RIA custody market heavily concentrated around Schwab and Fidelity. Vanguard addresses one of Altruist's biggest challenges with larger breakaway teams: providing a widely recognized financial brand that advisors can more easily explain to clients. Altruist gives Vanguard a technology-forward entry point into RIA custody as Vanguard continues expanding its strategy around access to financial advice. Advisors could benefit from greater competition through pressure on custody and technology pricing, service, product development, and innovation. A future referral channel could become an important part of the combination, particularly given Vanguard's enormous investor base and Altruist's growing network of RIAs. The acquisition also introduces potential conflicts and execution risks, including Vanguard's own advice businesses, the integration of two very different corporate cultures, and questions about whether Altruist can maintain its speed and independence over time. For breakaway advisors, the custody shortlist may have changed: Altruist can now pair its technology and fintech capabilities with the capital and reputation of Vanguard. https://youtu.be/UlgCBjLXrnw Quotable Moments “Custody is really a trust business.”— Louis Diamond (05:55) “Every time a well-capitalized player shows up, especially in custody, advisors win.”— Louis Diamond (12:33) “Really, it's tech-forward independence now without a brand trade-off.”— Louis Diamond (13:42) “There are always innovators showing up from outside the establishment, and every time one succeeds, advisors end up with more options and more leverage and more negotiating power than they had the year before.”— Louis Diamond (22:44) FAQs Why is Vanguard acquiring Altruist? Louis sees several strategic reasons for the acquisition. Altruist gives Vanguard an established technology and custody platform serving more than 6,000 advisors, while potentially expanding Vanguard's ability to reach investors through independent financial advisors. It may also provide another distribution channel for Vanguard investment products and future offerings. What does Vanguard's acquisition mean for Altruist? Altruist gains the backing of one of the world's largest and best-known investment firms while retaining, at least initially, its brand, leadership, and operating structure. Vanguard's capital could allow Altruist to continue investing in custody capabilities, technology, and products such as Hazel AI without relying on additional venture funding rounds. How could the acquisition affect RIA custody competition? Schwab and Fidelity currently dominate RIA custody. Louis believes a Vanguard-backed Altruist could become a stronger challenger by combining Altruist's technology and pricing model with Vanguard's scale, capital, and reputation. That could increase competitive pressure around pricing, service, technology, and innovation. Why could the deal matter to breakaway advisors? Altruist's technology has attracted advisor interest, but some larger breakaway teams have questioned whether clients would be comfortable holding substantial wealth with a less familiar custodian. Vanguard's ownership could substantially reduce that brand-recognition hurdle and make Altruist a more viable option for larger teams. Could Vanguard refer clients to advisors using Altruist? No referral program has been announced. However, Louis believes it is an important possibility to watch. Vanguard has more than 50 million investors, while Altruist provides access to thousands of independent advisors. Connecting investors seeking human advice with RIAs on the Altruist platform could create a meaningful new referral channel. Are there risks for advisors using a Vanguard-owned custodian? Potentially. Vanguard operates its own financial advice businesses, creating some of the same competitive concerns advisors have raised about other custodians with retail advice operations. Other questions include whether Altruist will remain operationally independent over time and whether its culture and pace of innovation can be maintained under Vanguard ownership. What happens next for Altruist, Schwab, and Fidelity? Louis expects the competitive response to be worth watching. He believes Schwab and Fidelity could respond through technology, AI, pricing, or other changes to their advisor offerings. He also expects Altruist to compete more aggressively for breakaway teams and sees the potential for Hazel AI to expand well beyond advisors who custody assets with Altruist. Does the Vanguard-Altruist deal change anything for advisors immediately? Not necessarily. The transaction still needs to close, and its longer-term impact will take time to emerge. But for advisors evaluating custodians, independence, or the value they receive from existing partners, the acquisition adds another factor to consider as the competitive landscape evolves. Louis sees several strategic reasons for the acquisition. Altruist gives Vanguard an established technology and custody platform serving more than 6,000 advisors, while potentially expanding Vanguard's ability to reach investors through independent financial advisors. It may also provide another distribution channel for Vanguard investment products and future offerings. Altruist gains the backing of one of the world's largest and best-known investment firms while retaining, at least initially, its brand, leadership, and operating structure. Vanguard's capital could allow Altruist to continue investing in custody capabilities, technology, and products such as Hazel AI without relying on additional venture funding rounds. Schwab and Fidelity currently dominate RIA custody. Louis believes a Vanguard-backed Altruist could become a stronger challenger by combining Altruist's technology and pricing model with Vanguard's scale, capital, and reputation. That could increase competitive pressure around pricing, service, technology, and innovation. Altruist's technology has attracted advisor interest, but some larger breakaway teams have questioned whether clients would be comfortable holding substantial wealth with a less familiar custodian. Vanguard's ownership could substantially reduce that brand-recognition hurdle and make Altruist a more viable option for larger teams. No referral program has been announced. However, Louis believes it is an important possibility to watch. Vanguard has more than 50 million investors, while Altruist provides access to thousands of independent advisors. Connecting investors seeking human advice with RIAs on the Altruist platform could create a meaningful new referral channel. Potentially. Vanguard operates its own financial advice businesses, creating some of the same competitive concerns advisors have raised about other custodians with retail advice operations. Other questions include whether Altruist will remain operationally independent over time and whether its culture and pace of innovation can be maintained under Vanguard ownership. Louis expects the competitive response to be worth watching. He believes Schwab and Fidelity could respond through technology, AI, pricing, or other changes to their advisor offerings. He also expects Altruist to compete more aggressively for breakaway teams and sees the potential for Hazel AI to expand well beyond advisors who custody assets with Altruist. Not necessarily. The transaction still needs to close, and its longer-term impact will take time to emerge. But for advisors evaluating custodians, independence, or the value they receive from existing partners, the acquisition adds another factor to consider as the competitive landscape evolves. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. Related Resources Rise and Reinvent: Joe Duran on Building and Rebuilding World-Class Firms From Insurance Sales to $8B RIA: A Northwestern Mutual Breakaway Story Diamond Consultants 4th Annual Advisor Transition Report View the transcript of this episode… Vanguard Acquires Altruist: What It Means for RIAs, Custody & Breakaway Advisors With Louis Diamond Louis Diamond (00:06): Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is a special rapid reaction industry update, Vanguard acquires Altruist, what it means for advisors in the industry. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is The Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond (00:28): At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. (01:21): Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond (02:05): Funny how the biggest news in the business almost never comes from the firms everyone is watching. On Wednesday, August 26th, 2026, Vanguard announced its acquiring Altruist. If you asked me a year ago to name the company most likely to buy an RIA custodian, Vanguard would not have been near the top of my list. Vanguard was in the RIA custody business once. They left in 2003 and handed roughly $120 billion of advisor assets to TD Ameritrade on the way out. 23 years later, they’re buying their way back in, reported $4 billion or more. So let’s talk about what happened, why it matters, and where I think it goes from here. (02:48): What happened? On August 26th, 2026, a definitive agreement was announced out of Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. A deal is closing later this year where Vanguard is acquiring Altruist, the relative upstart RIA custodian. The price, an undisclosed number, but a reported $4 billion, some outlets reporting $4.6 billion or more. Either way, more than double their last private market valuation at the end of April 2025. Another element is Altruist is staying as a standalone. They’ll keep their brand, CEO, management team, and operate the same model just as a wholly owned subsidiary of Vanguard. Altruist in one breath, for those unaware, was a custodian and fintech company founded in 2018 by Jason Wenk. They became a self-clearing custodian, third largest as far as number of advisors served, north of 6,000 advisors, and had a reputation for serving smaller or upstart advisors, but recently started getting into more of the larger market breakaway space. (03:53): One estimate I’ve seen peg’s Altruist market share of RIA custody at around 6%, but you compare that to about three quarters of the market for Schwab and Fidelity combined. So a relatively small player, but a rapidly emerging player and threat in US RIA custody. This is not the first time Vanguard has been involved with Altruist. They reportedly were an early investor in Altruist back in 2020 and former Vanguard CEO, Bill McNabb, has been on the board of Altruist, so a lot of history between the firms. Let’s get into now why I think this is interesting for the industry as a whole. In my view, custody has never really been all that competitive, especially since TD Ameritrade sold to Schwab. You really had an oligopoly between Schwab and Fidelity. Sure, there’s a number of compelling, say more boutique custodians, whether Pershing Advisor Solutions, Goldman Sachs, which was another newer entrant to custody, LPL, Raymond James, First Clearing, and a number of others are also in the space, but it is a market that is dramatically dominated by the two largest players. (05:01): So I think this matters because you add an amazing venerable brand and reputation of Vanguard with this scrappy upstart custodian, and all of a sudden you can see a world where custody is one of the more competitive spaces in the industry. Altruist, in my view too, was one of the first credible challengers to the incumbent custodians in 20-ish years. Goldman has since picked up some decent market share and certainly they’re attractive for the segment of advisors. But Altruist with their tech-forward approach, low fees, and even just the way they went to market as an antagonist to Schwab and Fidelity, they’re a big deal and I think this just magnifies what they’re able to do. The gap though for Altruist was brand and reputation. Sure, they had amazing tech. No one ever has doubted that. Hazel AI, which they recently launched has been very well received. (05:55): Advisors I’ve worked with who have demoed the platform are incredibly impressed. The big Achilles heel though for Altruist has been my clients don’t know who Altruist is. Why would my clients put their millions of dollars of wealth with a self-clearing custodian that doesn’t have the same scale or reputation as the incumbent custodians? Well, that really goes away here. And at the end of the day, custody is really a trust business, but you’d have to think that a client would trust their assets held with Vanguard or with Altruist through Vanguard in a very similar way that they would trust assets held by Bank of New York Mellon or Charles Schwab or Fidelity Investments or Goldman Sachs. So to me, Vanguard acquiring Altruist solves that problem in one sentence, very simple. Why I think this makes sense for Vanguard? Salim Ramji, the CEO of Vanguard, has been saying since he arrived from BlackRock two years ago that only one in five Americans work with a fee-based financial advisor and that quality advice shouldn’t be a luxury good and this shortage is only going to get worse as advisors retire. (07:00): This is really him putting his money where his mouth is and really trying to make financial advice, human directed financial advice more accessible to everyday Americans and the upper echelons of wealth in this country. Vanguard as a company has over 50 million reported investors and over 12 trillion in assets. A lot of these people want Vanguard advice, but Vanguard hasn’t had the manpower or the capacity to deliver it itself. Buying Altruist over time can certainly solve that capacity gap and make it so that a human-based financial advisor or any of Vanguard’s internal platforms now have a greater ability to provide advice to Americans looking for financial advisors in the United States. I think this also means more distribution capability for Vanguard funds. Not that Vanguard has ever had a problem with distribution. They have a relatively small wholesaling force compared to other firms, but given their cost and reputation and performance, they’re really on pretty much every platform. (08:04): Most advisors have some clients that are invested into Vanguard mutual funds or ETFs, but this I think just gives them a greater ability to distribute Vanguard products, probably in a similar way to Goldman’s approach. When Goldman entered US RIA custody, in large part, they were doing it for distribution of different things. For Goldman, it was private markets and lending and other types of products. Vanguard is more ETFs and mutual funds, but Vanguard has also been pushing more into the private market space, so I can definitely see a world in which they can ratchet up the distribution of their products in a fairly cost-efficient way. I think to me, the most interesting thing about this marriage is the mission overlap is quite real. When Vanguard started, and to this day, their goal was to provide quality investment products at a fraction of the cost of the incumbents so that investing can be accessible to everyday Americans. (08:59): That’s exactly the verbiage that Jason Wenk and Altruist has used from the beginning, where they want to become a all-in-one hub or tech-enabled custodian so that an advisor, regardless of their size and a client regardless of their AUM, have the ability to get quality advice. I recently listened to a podcast called Acquired. We’ll link it in the show notes, but it’s a three-hour in-depth look into the building of Vanguard. And if you combine that with the podcast episode that I recorded with Jason Wenk, the CEO of Altruist, if you play them side by side, the parallels are eerily similar. So we’ll link both into the show notes, but I really think both of these firms were cut from the same cloth and really from the beginning, both have gone against the grain and tried to rattle incumbent players in the industry. So at least on paper, seems like a very good match. (09:51): Why does this deal make sense for Altruist? For one, for Jason Wenk and his leadership team, this has to be the outcome you drew up, maybe even better. Founding a new custodian in 2018, selling it in 2026, eight years later for over $4 billion, that’s a pretty incredible return on time for this team. They deserve it all and built something special and really entered into a space where no one wanted to venture just given the market share of the major incumbents, but good for them and has to feel good to pull off this type of sale. I think the big thing too is the buyer is the story. Vanguard as a company, it’s investor owned. They’re not private equity owned. They’re not VC backed like Altruist was. So Altruist can get off of the fundraising treadmill. They don’t have to worry about fund life or a five-year hold period or an eventual sale to a strategic. (10:42): Now they can really just focus on the business at hand, having one of the most well-capitalized companies in the world as their capital backer and owner. And every advisor on a PE-backed platform knows the question hanging over every relationship, who owns this next? That’s a question they won’t have to answer anymore at all, and they can really just focus now going forward. I think this also gives Altruist a fortress balance sheet and a ton of capital to keep pushing and developing their Hazel AI platform, which was launched in September 2025. Hazel’s an AI tax planning tool, kind of AI superpower that really has taken the industry by storm and has started to be sold as a standalone product to RIAs. And from what I’ve seen, they’ve sold it to over 1600 new RIAs just in the first month alone for $60 a seat per month, and that’s available to folks if they custody at Altruist or not. (11:36): So this, I think, just gives them an ability to distribute their fintech solutions and certainly develop their custody platform in a way that maybe was challenging or not as possible before. They can also take a longer term view instead of having to worry about they raised a series F, whatever comes after F and an eventual sale, investors wanting to get a return on capital, they can now focus on building over the long term, which has been Vanguard’s strategy all along. I think too, this will give Altruist the ability to invest in new capabilities that they didn’t have before, whether it’s lending or whether it’s more on the product side. It takes a lot to be a custodian. It seems like a relatively straightforward business just holding assets, but there’s a lot of products, solutions, really requirements that everyday investors and RIA clients have, and I think this will just ratchet up Altruist’s ability to close some of the capability gaps that they’ve had since they launched and they’re very transparent about those. (12:33): What I’m most excited about this, just coming from my vantage point in the industry, is why should an advisor care? To me, there’s five things that advisors should really take notice of with this acquisition. First one’s competition. Every time a well-capitalized player shows up, especially in custody, advisors win. Schwab and Fidelity have fought Vanguard in the asset management space for decades, and more recently in financial advice. Now you’re adding custody against a firm that doesn’t need to be profitable the next quarter, and all of a sudden we very much have an arms race and some competition is good for pricing, for service, for innovation, and I think this is going to be only positives for clients across the country, having another competitive option and keeping the incumbents really on their toes. Another reason, the breakaway shortlist has changed. Objection I always heard about Altruist was, “The tech is great, the AI seems cool, but how do I explain the name Altruist to a 68-year-old client who’s leaving Merrill or UBS or Morgan Stanley?” (13:42): While someone may still get some objections because Vanguard may not have the same brand cache as Goldman Sachs or UBS Private Wealth or Merrill Private Wealth, that objection got a lot weaker today. Really, it’s tech-forward independence now without a brand trade-off. It’s a genuinely different offer in the market than it was before. Third, I think this is one that hasn’t been talked about much, but should be watched closely, potential for referrals. Schwab confirmed last week that it was taking the SAN or the Schwab Advisor Network client referral minimum from two million to five million. For anyone not aware, referrals from the retail branches of Schwab and Fidelity are one of the major organic growth funnels for many of the top RIAs in this country and have driven valuations to billions and billions of dollars for firms that are in this program. (14:36): I really do see this as being a potential new massive referral opportunity of Vanguard existing clients and customers to Altruist custody to RIAs at a time when Schwab is trying to keep more of those referrals from themselves, which is a very savvy strategy, but at the same time, probably creates a bit of an opening for Altruist and Vanguard to become a really good referral hub for clients, which is a major draw for signing up new RIAs as clients, for breakaway advisors, et cetera. (15:07): So more details need to come there. We don’t even know if they’re starting a referral channel, but I have to imagine that’s high in the punch list and will be a very compelling offering in the marketplace. Yeah, think about it. Vanguard is 50 million investors and a CEO who said multiple times that they don’t have enough advisors or humans to deliver this advice. So perfect. You now have a massive array of RIAs and more and more coming to the table who offer that advice and being able to still serve them, still keep the assets in-house, but do it in a way where Vanguard doesn’t have to scale up their advisor force. They now have advisors to refer to. Fourth is pricing. I think the Vanguard effect is going to be real here. When Vanguard started, and even to this day, they’ve been the one who’ve pushed down the expense ratio on mutual funds and ETFs. (15:56): It’s been a massive benefit to investors across this country. It’s been Altruist’s playbook all along too, more focused on the advisor, so offering amazing tech and a custody platform for virtually no cost to an advisor. So I would say whatever you’re paying for technology, for custody, and really anything else that Altruist and Vanguard might touch, I would expect it to go down potentially and just have more pressures on the incumbent firms to really sharpen their pencil or to get more creative on pricing and innovation. I think that the fifth thing to keep in mind is Schwab has long used its scale and positioning in the market to best competitors, whether it was going to $0 on tickets for equities and ETFs, et cetera, a number of years ago or a number of other strategies they’ve taken. Now you have a firm that has similar scale as Schwab, a reputation for playing the long game and being comfortable making less money in the process. (16:54): So again, massive benefit to the advisors to have another major player driving down costs and increasing innovation in the space. But this is not all positives. As with anything, there’s the good and the bad, and also some open questions. The biggest, I think, downside or potential thing to watch here, and certainly if you are a BDO at a custodian, this is the line you’re using, “Vanguard has its own advice business, personal advisor, digital advisor, and a CEO who stated that his goal is that an advisor is in every investor’s pocket.” So now you have the custodian that’s holding your client’s assets also running one of the largest advice operations in the country. We’ve heard this concern in the past about Schwab or Fidelity where you have RA custody and then these firms have massive retail distribution networks. So certainly Vanguard, I think, will be in the same lane. (17:46): And if you look at a Pershing or an LPL or Raymond James, it’s a little bit different because they don’t have their own channels in the same way that Schwab or Fidelity do. So certainly if you’re BNY Mellon in particular, which is a straight B2B custodian, this is a clear point of differentiation for Vanguard, Altruist and certainly versus the other custodians. Next one is Vanguard has said that Altruist will remain a standalone business. The brand will stay intact, the management team, et cetera. But in fairness, every acquirer says versions of the same thing. The real test is let’s wait two years, three years and see how converging roles or similar roles across the firm start to converge into one, and over time will they more Altruist brand and human capital into one structure. (18:36): Right now we don’t know, but I’m always a bit skeptical with acquisitions that you have the honeymoon period, takes time for the deals to close, and then what happens a couple of years down the line? Either as there’s new executives in charge, there’s turnover, or just there’s certain synergies that can be had, and the best way to do it is by combining operations and the like. (18:56): The next risk, I think it might sound a little bit mundane, but it’s culture and speed. Vanguard based in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, Altruist in LA, very different cultures. Altruist as a fintech company has been superfast to market, building, breaking things, innovating. And Vanguard, I think they’ve been extremely innovative on pricing, on product development, but I’ve never heard amazing reviews about Vanguard’s technology. So does this convergence of cultures create an issue? Does it create more bureaucracy for Altruist trying to build stuff? Is there a cultural mismatch when it comes to speed of market and innovation? And I think the last thing to keep in mind or to watch is the talent drainage at Altruist post-closing. Yes, I was a FinTech company and custodian offering equity, lots of upside for people that have taken this journey with them. Vanguard notoriously is the opposite. They don’t offer equity to anyone and they offer their employees high base salaries and you have a culture of longevity within the firm. (20:00): So after the lockup period is done for, or the earn out period is done for any Altruist equity owners and many of their employees, does that cause some talent drainage where folks want to go onto the next big thing, think what will happen to all the amazing SpaceX employees a year from now when their IPO lockups are done? Does that lead them to another opportunity? All these are questions I don’t know, but trying to play devil’s advocate. I think the biggest potential negative is just the Vanguard advice business as a competitor, a conflict to RIA custody. Let me give you a couple of predictions before we wrap here. I think Schwab and Fidelity will respond fast, whether it’s on the AI front or because the pressure is really on. I don’t know, maybe the $5 million referral minimum that Schwab just announced, maybe that sunsets after a period of time. I have no idea. (20:53): I’m also excited to see, we’ll call it the tech face off between Altruist and Robinhood. Robinhood acquired TradePMR, which is on the Wells Fargo First Clearing platform and is in the process of launching an RIA custodian themselves. So now you have, I think, two pretty incredible tech-forward custodians really trying to gain market share, so that will be fun to watch. Could there be a threat in the RIA platform space? So RIA platforms meaning RIAs, we call them supportive versions of independence, where advisors can plug into, they get technology, compliance, operations, et cetera, and still own their business. Given the end-to-end tech stack that Altruist boasts, and they’ve also been in development of their own corporate RIA, does that become that much more of a competitive feature that could possibly become a solution in and of itself that takes a dent out of these RIA platforms playbook? (21:45): I don’t know, but I think it’s possible. Altruist Hazel AI, does that push even well beyond custody? There’s a ton of AI and fintechs popping up around the industry. Hazel has certainly taken a lot of headlines and attention. With Vanguard behind it now, does that push the price lower? Does it help their distribution? Maybe you picture this, if you have a Vanguard-owned product sitting in the daily workflow of a competitor’s advisors, so let’s say you’re a Morgan Stanley, you’re a Schwab advisor, et cetera, do you now have a Vanguard-owned product in Hazel as part of your workflow or your fintech stack? Could be interesting. I will call a referral channel for Vanguard or Altruist, we’ll say within the next year or two. I think it would be crazy if that didn’t happen and that will be a massive disruptor. And finally, my prediction is more breakaways landing in Altruist. They’ve started to crack that door, but now with the powerful brand and reputation behind them, the sky’s probably the limit. (22:44): So in closing, a guy, Jason Wenk, started a company in 2018 in Los Angeles because he thought independent advisors deserve better software at a lower price. Eight years later, one of the most respected financial institutions in the world paid $4 billion for it, and the reason is he was right in that bet. There are always innovators showing up from outside the establishment, and every time one succeeds, advisors end up with more options and more leverage and more negotiating power than they had the year before. It’s a consistent theme across the industry. So nothing changes tomorrow, deals take time, deals have a way of falling apart, but if you’re evaluating custodians, thinking about independence for the first time, wondering whether your current partner is going to keep earning your business, today is a good day to reopen that question. And if you’re an advisor, I think cheer this on and be excited. (23:42): And as a industry participant, I am very excited to see how this deal takes hold and how this pushes the rest of the industry to innovate and continue to be better. So that’s it for today. Thank you for hearing my ramblings, and I’ll see you next time. Mindy Diamond (24:02): As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibilities seriously and are dedicated to your clients, but are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I Stay Or Should I Go? Is a book written with you in mind. It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively, whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. Vanguard Acquires Altruist: What It Means for RIAs, Custody & Breakaway Advisors With Louis Diamond Louis Diamond (00:06): Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is a special rapid reaction industry update, Vanguard acquires Altruist, what it means for advisors in the industry. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is The Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond (00:28): At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. (01:21): Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual advisor transition report. It’s the award-winning data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond (02:05): Funny how the biggest news in the business almost never comes from the firms everyone is watching. On Wednesday, August 26th, 2026, Vanguard announced its acquiring Altruist. If you asked me a year ago to name the company most likely to buy an RIA custodian, Vanguard would not have been near the top of my list. Vanguard was in the RIA custody business once. They left in 2003 and handed roughly $120 billion of advisor assets to TD Ameritrade on the way out. 23 years later, they’re buying their way back in, reported $4 billion or more. So let’s talk about what happened, why it matters, and where I think it goes from here. (02:48): What happened? On August 26th, 2026, a definitive agreement was announced out of Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. A deal is closing later this year where Vanguard is acquiring Altruist, the relative upstart RIA custodian. The price, an undisclosed number, but a reported $4 billion, some outlets reporting $4.6 billion or more. Either way, more than double their last private market valuation at the end of April 2025. Another element is Altruist is staying as a standalone. They’ll keep their brand, CEO, management team, and operate the same model just as a wholly owned subsidiary of Vanguard. Altruist in one breath, for those unaware, was a custodian and fintech company founded in 2018 by Jason Wenk. They became a self-clearing custodian, third largest as far as number of advisors served, north of 6,000 advisors, and had a reputation for serving smaller or upstart advisors, but recently started getting into more of the larger market breakaway space. (03:53): One estimate I’ve seen peg’s Altruist market share of RIA custody at around 6%, but you compare that to about three quarters of the market for Schwab and Fidelity combined. So a relatively small player, but a rapidly emerging player and threat in US RIA custody. This is not the first time Vanguard has been involved with Altruist. They reportedly were an early investor in Altruist back in 2020 and former Vanguard CEO, Bill McNabb, has been on the board of Altruist, so a lot of history between the firms. Let’s get into now why I think this is interesting for the industry as a whole. In my view, custody has never really been all that competitive, especially since TD Ameritrade sold to Schwab. You really had an oligopoly between Schwab and Fidelity. Sure, there’s a number of compelling, say more boutique custodians, whether Pershing Advisor Solutions, Goldman Sachs, which was another newer entrant to custody, LPL, Raymond James, First Clearing, and a number of others are also in the space, but it is a market that is dramatically dominated by the two largest players. (05:01): So I think this matters because you add an amazing venerable brand and reputation of Vanguard with this scrappy upstart custodian, and all of a sudden you can see a world where custody is one of the more competitive spaces in the industry. Altruist, in my view too, was one of the first credible challengers to the incumbent custodians in 20-ish years. Goldman has since picked up some decent market share and certainly they’re attractive for the segment of advisors. But Altruist with their tech-forward approach, low fees, and even just the way they went to market as an antagonist to Schwab and Fidelity, they’re a big deal and I think this just magnifies what they’re able to do. The gap though for Altruist was brand and reputation. Sure, they had amazing tech. No one ever has doubted that. Hazel AI, which they recently launched has been very well received. (05:55): Advisors I’ve worked with who have demoed the platform are incredibly impressed. The big Achilles heel though for Altruist has been my clients don’t know who Altruist is. Why would my clients put their millions of dollars of wealth with a self-clearing custodian that doesn’t have the same scale or reputation as the incumbent custodians? Well, that really goes away here. And at the end of the day, custody is really a trust business, but you’d have to think that a client would trust their assets held with Vanguard or with Altruist through Vanguard in a very similar way that they would trust assets held by Bank of New York Mellon or Charles Schwab or Fidelity Investments or Goldman Sachs. So to me, Vanguard acquiring Altruist solves that problem in one sentence, very simple. Why I think this makes sense for Vanguard? Salim Ramji, the CEO of Vanguard, has been saying since he arrived from BlackRock two years ago that only one in five Americans work with a fee-based financial advisor and that quality advice shouldn’t be a luxury good and this shortage is only going to get worse as advisors retire. (07:00): This is really him putting his money where his mouth is and really trying to make financial advice, human directed financial advice more accessible to everyday Americans and the upper echelons of wealth in this country. Vanguard as a company has over 50 million reported investors and over 12 trillion in assets. A lot of these people want Vanguard advice, but Vanguard hasn’t had the manpower or the capacity to deliver it itself. Buying Altruist over time can certainly solve that capacity gap and make it so that a human-based financial advisor or any of Vanguard’s internal platforms now have a greater ability to provide advice to Americans looking for financial advisors in the United States. I think this also means more distribution capability for Vanguard funds. Not that Vanguard has ever had a problem with distribution. They have a relatively small wholesaling force compared to other firms, but given their cost and reputation and performance, they’re really on pretty much every platform. (08:04): Most advisors have some clients that are invested into Vanguard mutual funds or ETFs, but this I think just gives them a greater ability to distribute Vanguard products, probably in a similar way to Goldman’s approach. When Goldman entered US RIA custody, in large part, they were doing it for distribution of different things. For Goldman, it was private markets and lending and other types of products. Vanguard is more ETFs and mutual funds, but Vanguard has also been pushing more into the private market space, so I can definitely see a world in which they can ratchet up the distribution of their products in a fairly cost-efficient way. I think to me, the most interesting thing about this marriage is the mission overlap is quite real. When Vanguard started, and to this day, their goal was to provide quality investment products at a fraction of the cost of the incumbents so that investing can be accessible to everyday Americans. (08:59): That’s exactly the verbiage that Jason Wenk and Altruist has used from the beginning, where they want to become a all-in-one hub or tech-enabled custodian so that an advisor, regardless of their size and a client regardless of their AUM, have the ability to get quality advice. I recently listened to a podcast called Acquired. We’ll link it in the show notes, but it’s a three-hour in-depth look into the building of Vanguard. And if you combine that with the podcast episode that I recorded with Jason Wenk, the CEO of Altruist, if you play them side by side, the parallels are eerily similar. So we’ll link both into the show notes, but I really think both of these firms were cut from the same cloth and really from the beginning, both have gone against the grain and tried to rattle incumbent players in the industry. So at least on paper, seems like a very good match. (09:51): Why does this deal make sense for Altruist? For one, for Jason Wenk and his leadership team, this has to be the outcome you drew up, maybe even better. Founding a new custodian in 2018, selling it in 2026, eight years later for over $4 billion, that’s a pretty incredible return on time for this team. They deserve it all and built something special and really entered into a space where no one wanted to venture just given the market share of the major incumbents, but good for them and has to feel good to pull off this type of sale. I think the big thing too is the buyer is the story. Vanguard as a company, it’s investor owned. They’re not private equity owned. They’re not VC backed like Altruist was. So Altruist can get off of the fundraising treadmill. They don’t have to worry about fund life or a five-year hold period or an eventual sale to a strategic. (10:42): Now they can really just focus on the business at hand, having one of the most well-capitalized companies in the world as their capital backer and owner. And every advisor on a PE-backed platform knows the question hanging over every relationship, who owns this next? That’s a question they won’t have to answer anymore at all, and they can really just focus now going forward. I think this also gives Altruist a fortress balance sheet and a ton of capital to keep pushing and developing their Hazel AI platform, which was launched in September 2025. Hazel’s an AI tax planning tool, kind of AI superpower that really has taken the industry by storm and has started to be sold as a standalone product to RIAs. And from what I’ve seen, they’ve sold it to over 1600 new RIAs just in the first month alone for $60 a seat per month, and that’s available to folks if they custody at Altruist or not. (11:36): So this, I think, just gives them an ability to distribute their fintech solutions and certainly develop their custody platform in a way that maybe was challenging or not as possible before. They can also take a longer term view instead of having to worry about they raised a series F, whatever comes after F and an eventual sale, investors wanting to get a return on capital, they can now focus on building over the long term, which has been Vanguard’s strategy all along. I think too, this will give Altruist the ability to invest in new capabilities that they didn’t have before, whether it’s lending or whether it’s more on the product side. It takes a lot to be a custodian. It seems like a relatively straightforward business just holding assets, but there’s a lot of products, solutions, really requirements that everyday investors and RIA clients have, and I think this will just ratchet up Altruist’s ability to close some of the capability gaps that they’ve had since they launched and they’re very transparent about those. (12:33): What I’m most excited about this, just coming from my vantage point in the industry, is why should an advisor care? To me, there’s five things that advisors should really take notice of with this acquisition. First one’s competition. Every time a well-capitalized player shows up, especially in custody, advisors win. Schwab and Fidelity have fought Vanguard in the asset management space for decades, and more recently in financial advice. Now you’re adding custody against a firm that doesn’t need to be profitable the next quarter, and all of a sudden we very much have an arms race and some competition is good for pricing, for service, for innovation, and I think this is going to be only positives for clients across the country, having another competitive option and keeping the incumbents really on their toes. Another reason, the breakaway shortlist has changed. Objection I always heard about Altruist was, “The tech is great, the AI seems cool, but how do I explain the name Altruist to a 68-year-old client who’s leaving Merrill or UBS or Morgan Stanley?” (13:42): While someone may still get some objections because Vanguard may not have the same brand cache as Goldman Sachs or UBS Private Wealth or Merrill Private Wealth, that objection got a lot weaker today. Really, it’s tech-forward independence now without a brand trade-off. It’s a genuinely different offer in the market than it was before. Third, I think this is one that hasn’t been talked about much, but should be watched closely, potential for referrals. Schwab confirmed last week that it was taking the SAN or the Schwab Advisor Network client referral minimum from two million to five million. For anyone not aware, referrals from the retail branches of Schwab and Fidelity are one of the major organic growth funnels for many of the top RIAs in this country and have driven valuations to billions and billions of dollars for firms that are in this program. (14:36): I really do see this as being a potential new massive referral opportunity of Vanguard existing clients and customers to Altruist custody to RIAs at a time when Schwab is trying to keep more of those referrals from themselves, which is a very savvy strategy, but at the same time, probably creates a bit of an opening for Altruist and Vanguard to become a really good referral hub for clients, which is a major draw for signing up new RIAs as clients, for breakaway advisors, et cetera. (15:07): So more details need to come there. We don’t even know if they’re starting a referral channel, but I have to imagine that’s high in the punch list and will be a very compelling offering in the marketplace. Yeah, think about it. Vanguard is 50 million investors and a CEO who said multiple times that they don’t have enough advisors or humans to deliver this advice. So perfect. You now have a massive array of RIAs and more and more coming to the table who offer that advice and being able to still serve them, still keep the assets in-house, but do it in a way where Vanguard doesn’t have to scale up their advisor force. They now have advisors to refer to. Fourth is pricing. I think the Vanguard effect is going to be real here. When Vanguard started, and even to this day, they’ve been the one who’ve pushed down the expense ratio on mutual funds and ETFs. (15:56): It’s been a massive benefit to investors across this country. It’s been Altruist’s playbook all along too, more focused on the advisor, so offering amazing tech and a custody platform for virtually no cost to an advisor. So I would say whatever you’re paying for technology, for custody, and really anything else that Altruist and Vanguard might touch, I would expect it to go down potentially and just have more pressures on the incumbent firms to really sharpen their pencil or to get more creative on pricing and innovation. I think that the fifth thing to keep in mind is Schwab has long used its scale and positioning in the market to best competitors, whether it was going to $0 on tickets for equities and ETFs, et cetera, a number of years ago or a number of other strategies they’ve taken. Now you have a firm that has similar scale as Schwab, a reputation for playing the long game and being comfortable making less money in the process. (16:54): So again, massive benefit to the advisors to have another major player driving down costs and increasing innovation in the space. But this is not all positives. As with anything, there’s the good and the bad, and also some open questions. The biggest, I think, downside or potential thing to watch here, and certainly if you are a BDO at a custodian, this is the line you’re using, “Vanguard has its own advice business, personal advisor, digital advisor, and a CEO who stated that his goal is that an advisor is in every investor’s pocket.” So now you have the custodian that’s holding your client’s assets also running one of the largest advice operations in the country. We’ve heard this concern in the past about Schwab or Fidelity where you have RA custody and then these firms have massive retail distribution networks. So certainly Vanguard, I think, will be in the same lane. (17:46): And if you look at a Pershing or an LPL or Raymond James, it’s a little bit different because they don’t have their own channels in the same way that Schwab or Fidelity do. So certainly if you’re BNY Mellon in particular, which is a straight B2B custodian, this is a clear point of differentiation for Vanguard, Altruist and certainly versus the other custodians. Next one is Vanguard has said that Altruist will remain a standalone business. The brand will stay intact, the management team, et cetera. But in fairness, every acquirer says versions of the same thing. The real test is let’s wait two years, three years and see how converging roles or similar roles across the firm start to converge into one, and over time will they more Altruist brand and human capital into one structure. (18:36): Right now we don’t know, but I’m always a bit skeptical with acquisitions that you have the honeymoon period, takes time for the deals to close, and then what happens a couple of years down the line? Either as there’s new executives in charge, there’s turnover, or just there’s certain synergies that can be had, and the best way to do it is by combining operations and the like. (18:56): The next risk, I think it might sound a little bit mundane, but it’s culture and speed. Vanguard based in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, Altruist in LA, very different cultures. Altruist as a fintech company has been superfast to market, building, breaking things, innovating. And Vanguard, I think they’ve been extremely innovative on pricing, on product development, but I’ve never heard amazing reviews about Vanguard’s technology. So does this convergence of cultures create an issue? Does it create more bureaucracy for Altruist trying to build stuff? Is there a cultural mismatch when it comes to speed of market and innovation? And I think the last thing to keep in mind or to watch is the talent drainage at Altruist post-closing. Yes, I was a FinTech company and custodian offering equity, lots of upside for people that have taken this journey with them. Vanguard notoriously is the opposite. They don’t offer equity to anyone and they offer their employees high base salaries and you have a culture of longevity within the firm. (20:00): So after the lockup period is done for, or the earn out period is done for any Altruist equity owners and many of their employees, does that cause some talent drainage where folks want to go onto the next big thing, think what will happen to all the amazing SpaceX employees a year from now when their IPO lockups are done? Does that lead them to another opportunity? All these are questions I don’t know, but trying to play devil’s advocate. I think the biggest potential negative is just the Vanguard advice business as a competitor, a conflict to RIA custody. Let me give you a couple of predictions before we wrap here. I think Schwab and Fidelity will respond fast, whether it’s on the AI front or because the pressure is really on. I don’t know, maybe the $5 million referral minimum that Schwab just announced, maybe that sunsets after a period of time. I have no idea. (20:53): I’m also excited to see, we’ll call it the tech face off between Altruist and Robinhood. Robinhood acquired TradePMR, which is on the Wells Fargo First Clearing platform and is in the process of launching an RIA custodian themselves. So now you have, I think, two pretty incredible tech-forward custodians really trying to gain market share, so that will be fun to watch. Could there be a threat in the RIA platform space? So RIA platforms meaning RIAs, we call them supportive versions of independence, where advisors can plug into, they get technology, compliance, operations, et cetera, and still own their business. Given the end-to-end tech stack that Altruist boasts, and they’ve also been in development of their own corporate RIA, does that become that much more of a competitive feature that could possibly become a solution in and of itself that takes a dent out of these RIA platforms playbook? (21:45): I don’t know, but I think it’s possible. Altruist Hazel AI, does that push even well beyond custody? There’s a ton of AI and fintechs popping up around the industry. Hazel has certainly taken a lot of headlines and attention. With Vanguard behind it now, does that push the price lower? Does it help their distribution? Maybe you picture this, if you have a Vanguard-owned product sitting in the daily workflow of a competitor’s advisors, so let’s say you’re a Morgan Stanley, you’re a Schwab advisor, et cetera, do you now have a Vanguard-owned product in Hazel as part of your workflow or your fintech stack? Could be interesting. I will call a referral channel for Vanguard or Altruist, we’ll say within the next year or two. I think it would be crazy if that didn’t happen and that will be a massive disruptor. And finally, my prediction is more breakaways landing in Altruist. They’ve started to crack that door, but now with the powerful brand and reputation behind them, the sky’s probably the limit. (22:44): So in closing, a guy, Jason Wenk, started a company in 2018 in Los Angeles because he thought independent advisors deserve better software at a lower price. Eight years later, one of the most respected financial institutions in the world paid $4 billion for it, and the reason is he was right in that bet. There are always innovators showing up from outside the establishment, and every time one succeeds, advisors end up with more options and more leverage and more negotiating power than they had the year before. It’s a consistent theme across the industry. So nothing changes tomorrow, deals take time, deals have a way of falling apart, but if you’re evaluating custodians, thinking about independence for the first time, wondering whether your current partner is going to keep earning your business, today is a good day to reopen that question. And if you’re an advisor, I think cheer this on and be excited. (23:42): And as a industry participant, I am very excited to see how this deal takes hold and how this pushes the rest of the industry to innovate and continue to be better. So that’s it for today. Thank you for hearing my ramblings, and I’ll see you next time. Mindy Diamond (24:02): As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibilities seriously and are dedicated to your clients, but are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firms or could a better option exist? Should I Stay Or Should I Go? Is a book written with you in mind. It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively, whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook.
Nvidia's results are likely to drive the market today ahead of Friday's speech from Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh. Investors are also digesting results from Salesforce and Crowdstrike. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Investors will have plenty to monitor today. The Fed's favorite inflation gauge and GDP data are due this morning, while Nvidia and other major tech earnings arrive after the bell. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Derek Moore is joined by Mike Snyder and Shane Skinner this week to talk about Big Oil posting its best free cash flow quarter ever, $70 billion across the top five majors, without the war-driven price spike that powered the last record. Plus, gold pushing back higher as ETF flows return, the Citi global economic surprise index at its highest since 2022, an AI capex boom that lands as an import drag on GDP, midterm year seasonality, and a housing market where buyers have gone missing while prices sit at records. All that and more this week. The top five international oil majors generated $70 billion in free cash flow last quarter. That tops the previous high set during the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Tobias Carlisle credits cost discipline, portfolio high-grading, and capital restraint. Is record oil profitability without a price spike a sign of structural improvement? Luke Kawa flags the Citi global economic surprise index at 41.6, highest since April 2022. Weakness in long-term government bonds around the world may be a good news story. Term premiums in the US, UK, Germany, and Japan have shifted since Warsh's first FOMC. Gold has climbed from the low $3,000s an ounce last August to near $5,500 today. Goldman Sachs data shows spot gold ETF flows turning positive again alongside performance. Liz Ann Sonders shows the AI capex boom driving imports while exports stay muted. Net exports remain a drag on real GDP even as fixed investment keeps growing. Seasonality shows the S&P 500's typical midterm election year path over 99 years. Schwab data breaks down which sectors have stocks at four-week and 52-week highs. The Daily Shot shows the housing buyer and seller mismatch has flipped since 2021-2022. The number of home buyers has fallen to a record low, widening the gap with sellers. Case-Shiller's national home price index hit a record 335.10 as of May 31, 2026. Charlie Bilello notes the median monthly mortgage payment went from $862 to $2,240. Mortgage rates went from 3.4% to 6.7% and median prices from $243k to $434k in a decade. Mentioned in this Episode Derek Moore's book Broken Pie Chart https://amzn.to/3S8ADNT Jay Pestrichelli's book Buy and Hedge https://amzn.to/3jQYgMt Derek's book on public speaking Effortless Public Speaking https://amzn.to/3hL1Mag Contact Derek derek.moore@zegainvestments.com
Consumer confidence and new home sales reports are on the menu today, but attention remains on looming Nvidia earnings and PCE inflation data amid brewing trade tensions. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
The Fed's favored inflation gauge, the Jackson Hole Symposium, and Nvidia earnings highlight a critical week with oil prices and Treasury yields rising. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Guests include: Cory Provus, Minnesota Twins Play by Play Broadcaster; Matt Weidler, Velva Head Football Coach and; Brady Schwab, Thompson Head Football Coac
In this episode of On Investing, Liz Ann Sonders and Collin Martin examine the recent surge in global bond yields and what it means for investors. Collin explains that long-term Treasury yields have risen due to a combination of the Federal Reserve's hawkish posture, elevated uncertainty premiums, fiscal concerns, and a global move higher in interest rates. He emphasizes that inflation expectations remain relatively well-behaved, suggesting the rise in yields is less about fears of runaway inflation and more about uncertainty, government borrowing needs, and a "higher for longer" interest rate environment. Liz Ann discusses how higher yields affect stocks, noting that growth-oriented sectors, real estate, and utilities are particularly sensitive to rising rates. She also argues that investors may be operating in a more volatile "Temperamental Era," where inflation and bond yields play a larger role in driving equity market performance than they did during the decades-long "Great Moderation." Then, Liz Ann interviews former St. Louis Fed President Jim Bullard, who argues that the Federal Reserve risks falling behind the curve by tolerating inflation near 3% rather than returning it to its 2% target. Bullard shares his views on monetary policy, AI's potential impact on productivity, geopolitical risks, financial markets, and the evolving economic landscape. Finally, Liz Ann and Collin provide a preview of upcoming economic indicators and data releases, including the Fed's preferred inflation measure, housing data, and consumer sentiment surveys. You can read the report Liz Ann mentions here: “Great Moderation Era: Drift(ing) Away.” On Investing is an original podcast from Charles Schwab. For more on the show, visit schwab.com/OnInvesting. If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating or review on Apple Podcasts. Important Disclosures The comments, views, and opinions expressed in the presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily represent the views of Charles Schwab. This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for his or her own particular situation before making any investment decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market, economic or political conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal. Performance may be affected by risks associated with non-diversification, including investments in specific countries or sectors. Additional risks may also include, but are not limited to, investments in foreign securities, especially emerging markets, real estate investment trusts (REITs), fixed income, municipal securities including state specific municipal securities, small capitalization securities and commodities. Each individual investor should consider these risks carefully before investing in a particular security or strategy. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Treasury Inflation Protected Securities (TIPS) are inflation-linked securities issued by the US Government whose principal value is adjusted periodically in accordance with the rise and fall in the inflation rate. Thus, the dividend amount payable is also impacted by variations in the inflation rate, as it is based upon the principal value of the bond. It may fluctuate up or down. Repayment at maturity is guaranteed by the US Government and may be adjusted for inflation to become the greater of the original face amount at issuance or that face amount plus an adjustment for inflation. Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities are guaranteed by the US Government, but inflation-protected bond funds do not provide such a guarantee. All names and market data shown are for illustrative purposes only and are not a recommendation, offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. Forecasts contained herein are for illustrative purposes only, may be based upon proprietary research and are developed through analysis of historical public data. The policy analysis provided by Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. (0826-Z0K4) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
A light earnings and economic slate could keep oil prices and Treasury yields in the spotlight today. Yields rose Thursday despite another Treasury Department intervention pledge. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Walmart's results loom before the open. Yesterday saw bond yields fall as the Treasury stepped in. Fed minutes revealed some willingness to raise rates if inflation doesn't cool. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
On this episode of the "ETF of the Week" podcast, VettaFi's Head of Research, Todd Rosenbluth, discussed the Schwab Fundamental U.S. Large Company ETF (FNDX) with Chuck Jaffe of Money Life.
In Episode 232, Sarah is joined by returning guest Anderson McKean of Page & Palette Bookstore for the 2026 edition of Micro Genres! Each year, this series gives us a chance to niche down even further into the kinds of books we love — spotlighting those very specific sub-sub-genres that capture a particular reading taste. This year, Sarah and Anderson have 10 all-new Micro Genres to share, along with standout books for each. With more than 80 books mentioned, you're bound to find a few new additions to your TBR — and maybe recognize a Micro Genre or two of your own. This post contains affiliate links through which I make a small commission when you make a purchase (at no cost to you!). CLICK HERE for the full episode Show Notes on the blog. Politically-Adjacent Stories (Sarah) The Hopefuls by Jennifer Close (2016) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [3:00] Charlotte Walsh Like to Win by Jo Piazza (2018) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [3:11] American Wife by Curtis Sittenfeld (2008) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [3:36] Rodham by Curtis Sittenfeld (2020) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [3:38] Vantage Point by Sara Sligar (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [3:47] The Emperor of Ocean Park (Elm Harbor, 1) by Stephen L. Carter (2002) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [4:48] Palace Council (Elm Harbor, 3) by Stephen L. Carter (2008) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [4:49] The Boomerang by Robert Bailey (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [5:23] State of Terror by Louise Penny and Hillary Clinton (2021) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [6:14] The Situation Room by George Stephanopoulos (2024) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [6:55] Becoming by Michelle Obama (2018) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [8:18] From the Corner of the Oval by Beck Dorey-Stein (2018) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [8:53] Retellings that Are NOT Mythological (Anderson) Lady Tremaine by Rachel Hochhauser (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [10:41] The Beheading Game by Rebecca Lehmann (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [10:58] Beautiful Little Fools by Jillian Cantor (2022) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [11:55] Hester by Laurie Lico Albanese (2022) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [12:23] Honeysuckle by Bar Fridman-Tell (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [12:55] Eligible by Curtis Sittenfeld (2016) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [14:03] Anna K (Anna K, 1) by Jenny Lee (2020) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [14:08] Demon Copperhead by Barbara Kingsolver (2022) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [14:20] The Kind Worth Killing by Peter Swanson (2015) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [14:36] The Favorites by Layne Fargo (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [14:48] Broken Country by Clare Leslie Hall (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [14:57] Wasp's Nest by Kat Stoddard (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [15:26] A Thousand Acres by Jane Smiley (1991) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [15:39] Other Books Mentioned The Scarlet Letter by Nathaniel Hawthorne (1850) [12:32] James by Percival Everett (2024) [12:36] Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen (1813) [14:07] Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy (1878) [14:11] David Copperfield by Charles Dickens (1850) [14:24] Strangers on a Train by Patricia Highsmith (1950) [14:41] Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë (1847) [14:55] The Go-Between by L. P. Hartley (1953) [15:03] The Philadelphia Story by Philip Barry (1939) [15:32] King Lear by William Shakespeare (1608) [15:45] Ministers Behaving Badly (Sarah) Dominion by Addie E. Citchens (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [16:36] Awake by Jen Hatmaker (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [16:45] God Spare the Girls by Kelsey McKinney (2021) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [17:19] The True Confessions of First Lady Freeman by Deesha Philyaw (Sep 29, 2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [17:36] The Dearly Beloved by Cara Wall (2019) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [17:51] The Poisonwood Bible by Barbara Kingsolver (1998) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [18:16] Dear Reader / Love Letters to Books (Anderson) This Book Made Me Think of You by Libby Page (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [19:14] The Starless Sea by Erin Morgenstern (2019) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [19:53] The Borrower by Rebecca Makkai (2011) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [20:22] Dear Fahrenheit 451 by Anne Spence (2017) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [22:24] Mr. Penumbra's 24-Hour Bookstore by Robin Sloan (2012) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [22:37] The Storied Life of A. J. Fikry by Gabrielle Zevin (2014) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [22:56] Other Books Mentioned I Have Some Questions for You by Rebecca Makkai (2023) [20:29] The Great Believers by Rebecca Makkai (2018) [20:31] Yellowface by R. F. Kuang (2023) [22:15] Dark Humor (Sarah) Rabbit Cake by Annie Hartnett (2017) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [23:52] Unlikely Animals by Annie Hartnett (2022) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [23:53] The Road to Tender Hearts by Annie Hartnett (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [23:55] Goodbye, Vitamin by Rachel Khong (2017) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [24:41] Cleo Dang Would Rather Be Dead by Mai Nguyen (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [25:42] Lost Lambs by Madeline Cash (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [25:51] The Heart's Invisible Furies by John Boyne (2017) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [26:00] Here One Moment by Liane Moriarty (2024) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [26:47] Other Books Mentioned Real Americans by Rachel Khong (2024) [24:44] Fantasy Even Sarah Might Like / Fantasy-Lite (Anderson) Conform (Conform Series, 1) by Ariel Sullivan (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [28:54] The Night Circus by Erin Morgenstern (2011) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [30:13] The Familiar by Leigh Bardugo (2024) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [30:39] The Atlas Six (The Atlas Trilogy, 1) by Olivie Blake (2022)* | Amazon | Bookshop.org [30:53] A Darker Shade of Magic (Shades of Magic, 1) by V. E. Schwab (2015) | Amazon| Bookshop.org [31:57] Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil by V. E. Schwab (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [32:02] The Midnight Train (The Midnight World, 2) by Matt Haig (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [32:04] The Midnight Library (The Midnight World, 1) by Matt Haig (2020) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [32:05] The Measure by Nikki Erlick (2022) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [32:20] The Dream Hotel by Laila Lalami (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [32:25] The Other Valley by Scott Alexander Howard (2024) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [32:28] Other Books Mentioned The Hunger Games (The Hunger Games, 1) by Suzanne Collins (2008) [29:03] The Handmaid's Tale (The Handmaid's Tale, 1) by Margaret Atwood (1985) [29:04] Like Friday Night Lights, But Book Form (Sarah) a.k.a. Sports Books That Are About Far More Than Sports The Art of Fielding by Chad Harbach (2011) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [35:06] The Slip by Lucas Schaefer (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [35:15] The World According to Garp by John Irving (1978) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [35:51] In One Person by John Irving (2012) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [35:53] Carrie Soto Is Back by Taylor Jenkins Reid (2022) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [36:12] The Flock by Ellen Bar (Apr 27, 2027) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [36:41] The Last Days of Vic & Coco by Taylor Jenkins Reid (Mar 2, 2027) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [38:31] Other Books Mentioned The Amateur by Chris Bohjalian (2026) [37:29] The Double Bind by Chris Bohjalian (2007) [37:48] Women Rule the World (Anderson) The Romanov Empress by C. W. Gortner (2018) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [40:16] Mademoiselle Chanel by C. W. Gortner (2015) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [40:41] Marlene by C. W. Gortner (2016) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [40:43] The Woman with the Cure by Lynn Cullen (2023) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [41:07] Mrs. Poe by Lynn Cullen (2013) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [41:28] Twain's End by Lynn Cullen (2015) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [41:31] Lady Clementine by Marie Benedict (2020) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [41:36] The Other Einstein by Marie Benedict (2016) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [41:53] The Only Woman in the Room by Marie Benedict (2019) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [41:47] Daughter of a Daughter of a Queen by Sarah Bird (2018) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [42:03] Other Books Mentioned Z: A Novel of Zelda Fitzgerald by Therese Anne Fowler (2013) [43:13] Isola by Allegra Goodman (2025) [43:32] Royals (Sarah) The Royal We (The Royal We, 1) by Heather Cocks and Jessica Morgan (2015) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [45:04] Red, White & Royal Blue (Red, White & Royal Blue, 1) by Casey McQuiston(2019) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [45:06] American Royals (American Royals, 1) by Katharine McGee (2019) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [45:09] Spare by Prince Harry (2023) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [45:19] The Force of Such Beauty by Barbara Bourland (2022) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [45:29] The Heir Apparent by Rebecca Armitage (2025) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [45:48] The Windsor Affair by Melanie Benjamin (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [46:03] This Land is Your Land (Anderson) Land by Maggie O'Farrell (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [46:34] Damnation Spring by Ash Davidson (2021) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [47:33] I Will Send Rain by Rae Meadows (2016) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [47:52] The Well and the Mine by Gin Phillips (2007) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [48:07] Greenwood by Michael Christie (US Release 2020) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [49:03] The Islanders by Lewis Robinson (2024) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [49:32] The Shark House by Sara Ackerman (2026) | Amazon | Bookshop.org [49:40] *Publication year reflects the later traditionally published edition for a book originally self-published.
Rising U.S. and global yields continue to drag the stock market, now down three days in a row. Fed minutes later could shed light on the rate debate. Target reports this morning. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
This episode kicks off a three-part discussion of the Villains series by V.E. Schwab, featuring special guest Morgan Ward (@beakerbarnes) here to talk about the first book, Vicious.We discuss all things superheroes, the yin and yang of Victor and Eli, some of our hopes for the third book, and more. CONTENT WARNING for discussions of child abuse, suicide, and self-harm. Please listen at your own discretion.Follow @talesofpanem on Twitter / Instagram / TikTok for updates, episode information, and more.Contact me: talesofpanem@gmail.comFind Morgan on Twitter and Instagram and listen to Mutant Studies 101.----Resources to donate or find other ways to get involved:Fight for the FutureFunds for GazaOperation Olive BranchWomen's Health and Reproductive Rights OrgsSubscribe to the Project Fulcrum newsletter Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Housing starts and building permits arrive this morning along with Home Depot earnings after a weak Monday that saw higher yields and oil weigh on major indexes. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Charles Schwab Chief Investment Strategist Liz Ann Sonders says we're reverting back to the "temperamental era" of the 1960s - 1990s. She discusses further with Bloomberg's Tom Keene and Paul Sweeney. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Rising oil sent yields higher and slowed market gains last week amid a slate of relatively soft U.S. data. This week brings retailer results, but war remains a large concern. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Financial stress can affect anyone, regardless of income. In this episode, Mark talks with Cindy Scott about the emotional side of money and explores practical strategies for reducing financial anxiety through planning, perspective, and better decision-making. They discuss how financial habits are formed, why stress can lead to costly mistakes, and how building financial resilience can help you stay focused on your long-term goals. After you listen: Read Cindy Scott's article "5 Steps to Help Lower Your Financial Stress" for practical strategies to help you manage financial anxiety and build confidence. Explore the Schwab Money Talk series for insights on financial planning, investing, retirement, and other everyday money topics. Financial Decoder is an original podcast from Charles Schwab. If you enjoy the show, please leave us a rating or review on Apple Podcasts. Reach out to Mark on X @MarkRiepe with your thoughts on the show. Follow Financial Decoder on Spotify to comment on episodes. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for his or her own particular situation before making any investment decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market, economic or political conditions. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Schwab Wealth Advisory™ ("SWA") is a non‐discretionary investment advisory program sponsored by Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. ("Schwab"). Schwab Wealth Advisory, Inc. ("SWAI") is a Registered Investment Adviser and provides portfolio management for the SWA program. Schwab and SWAI are affiliates and are subsidiaries of The Charles Schwab Corporation. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. 0826-WTP3 Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Liz Ann Sonders and Collin Martin begin this episode by analyzing the powerful role earnings are playing in driving the U.S. stock market higher and what that means for investors. Liz Ann highlights that S&P 500 earnings growth is tracking around 51% for the second quarter, an unusually strong pace outside of a post-recession recovery. Collin explains why Schwab expects a "higher-for-longer" rate environment, with short- and longer-term Treasury yields likely remaining elevated as the economy stays resilient and inflation remains above the Fed's target. Then Collin sits down with former Federal Reserve Vice Chair Dr. Richard Clarida. They discuss how the Fed thinks about inflation, labor markets, supply shocks, productivity, and AI. Clarida argues that policymakers are trying to determine whether today's inflation pressures are temporary or indicative of a higher underlying trend. He also discusses the transition to new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, potential changes to Fed communications, and why AI could be inflationary in the near term but ultimately disinflationary through improved productivity over the next several years. On Investing is an original podcast from Charles Schwab. For more on the show, visit schwab.com/OnInvesting. If you enjoy the show, please leave a rating or review on Apple Podcasts. Important Disclosures The comments, views, and opinions expressed in the presentation are those of the speakers and do not necessarily represent the views of Charles Schwab. This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for his or her own particular situation before making any investment decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market, economic or political conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal. Performance may be affected by risks associated with non-diversification, including investments in specific countries or sectors. Additional risks may also include, but are not limited to, investments in foreign securities, especially emerging markets, real estate investment trusts (REITs), fixed income, municipal securities including state specific municipal securities, small capitalization securities and commodities. Each individual investor should consider these risks carefully before investing in a particular security or strategy. Currencies are speculative, very volatile and not suitable for all investors. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Diversification, rebalancing, and asset allocation strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. All names and market data shown are for illustrative purposes only and are not a recommendation, offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy any security. Forecasts contained herein are for illustrative purposes only, may be based upon proprietary research and are developed through analysis of historical public data. The policy analysis provided by Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions ISM refers to the Institute for Supply Management. (0826-VELR) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
After Thursday's all-time SPX highs on falling oil and yields, investors face another test this morning with July retail sales, seen up 0.2%. Retail earnings start next week. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Suds, Schwab, JT, and Nick Sr. jump into the studio for another White Sox Therapy session after a frustrating series loss to Cincinnati — but with the Sox still sitting 2.5 games up in the AL Central as the dog days of August arrive. The guys break down a rough stretch that included the bullpen collapse against the Reds, Davis Martin's continued first-inning struggles, and a 7–9 record over the previous two weeks. Despite the recent skid, the Sox remain in first place heading into a massive weekend series in Detroit.Then it's time to revisit the trade deadline and hand out grades for Chris Getz's moves.Topics include:The painful series loss to CincinnatiWhether Will Venable mismanaged the bullpenDavis Martin's first-inning struggles and whether the Sox should use an openerLuis Castillo's impressive early showing and increased changeup usageTrading Boston Smith and whether the Sox gave up a future impact batBrenton Doyle's defense, speed, and long-term fit in center fieldThe addition of Huascar Brazoban to the bullpenOverall grades for the White Sox trade deadlineWhether the Sox should have been more aggressive with rental pitchingThe heated debate over Colson Montgomery's futureWhether Montgomery should have been traded for controllable starting pitchingHis power, strikeout issues, and struggles with runners in scoring positionThe Sox's young infield depth with prospects waiting in the wingsAnthony Kay's strong stretch, Chase Meidroth's hot bat, and Edgar Quero's improvementDrew Thorpe and other pitching reinforcements potentially on the wayThe episode closes with some much-needed PMA. Despite heartbreaking losses, slumps, and plenty of reasons for White Sox fans to panic, this young team continues to bounce back — and they still control the AL Central heading into one of the biggest series of the season.Is this team ready to hold onto first place and make a real run at October, or will the lack of a bigger deadline splash come back to haunt them?The sky isn't falling yet.Sit back, relax, hold on for one more day… and strap it down, White Sox Therapy.
Mindy Diamond on Independence: A Podcast for Financial Advisors Considering Change
Patrick Larkin, Partner & Practice Leader, Cerity Partners Three years after launching his independent RIA, Patrick Larkin merged with Cerity Partners—but not because that was the original plan. He explains how ownership changed the way he viewed enterprise value, optionality, and the future of his business. In Summary Going independent is often viewed as the destination. Patrick Larkin discovered it was just the beginning. Louis sits down with Patrick, Partner and Practice Leader at Cerity Partners and former founder of Oak Hill Wealth Advisors, to discuss an unconventional journey: leaving Wells Fargo to build an independent RIA, then choosing to merge that business just three years later. Rather than following a predetermined exit strategy, Patrick shares how ownership fundamentally changed the way he thought about enterprise value. A conversation with a prospective acquirer revealed that buyers weren't interested in purchasing a book of business—they were looking for a business. That realization reshaped how he invested, hired, delegated, and ultimately positioned his firm for the future. The conversation from our Build Grow & Transact series also offers a candid look at life after a merger, from evaluating cultural fit and partnership to balancing autonomy with the resources of a larger organization. More broadly, it illustrates how ownership creates optionality—and why the most valuable decision an advisor makes may not be the one they originally envisioned. The Storyline After spending nearly 15 years building a successful practice at AG Edwards, Wachovia, and Wells Fargo, Patrick Larkin launched Oak Hill Wealth Advisors in 2022 with a simple objective: build a business on his own terms. Like many advisors, he expected independence to be the final destination for a long time. But then there was the realization that ownership changes more than economics; it changes perspective. And it became the beginning of an entirely different way of thinking. As acquisition inquiries arrived sooner than expected, Patrick realized something that fundamentally changed his strategy. Sophisticated buyers weren't evaluating his client relationships as a book of business; they were evaluating Oak Hill as an enterprise. That insight shifted his priorities from maximizing short-term profitability to building a business that could thrive beyond its founder. Just three years after launching, Patrick chose to merge with Cerity Partners—not because he was looking for an exit, but because he believed it strengthened the future for his clients, his team, and his family. Louis and Patrick explore what led to that decision, how ownership increased the value of his business almost immediately, why he compares independence to an IPO, and what advisors should consider if they hope to create options for the future—even if they don't yet know what that future looks like. Topics Covered Building enterprise value versus maximizing annual income Creating optionality through ownership Leaving Wells Fargo to launch an independent RIA Why buyers value businesses more than books of business Evaluating strategic partners and acquisition opportunities The economics of independence and business valuation Life after merging with Cerity Partners Balancing autonomy with enterprise-scale resources Leadership, succession, and building beyond the founder Long-term ownership and partnership models > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why did Patrick decide to leave Wells Fargo? (11:07) Patrick explains why growing frustrations around control, firm priorities, and the ability to build his business eventually outweighed the comfort of staying put. How did going independent immediately change the value of his business? (21:42) Patrick introduces one of the episode's biggest ideas: why launching Oak Hill felt like taking a company public and how ownership increased the firm's value almost overnight. Why did Patrick sell only three years after becoming independent? (20:03) An unexpected conversation with a prospective acquirer completely changed how he viewed enterprise value and accelerated his long-term thinking. What separates a business from a book of business? (21:42) Patrick discusses why recruiting advisors, delegating client relationships, and investing beyond himself made Oak Hill more attractive to strategic buyers. Why Cerity Partners? (26:48) Rather than focusing on valuation, Cerity emphasized culture, partnership, and long-term alignment—qualities Patrick says ultimately mattered most. What is life actually like after a merger? (37:57) Patrick offers an unusually candid perspective on autonomy, leadership, and why he says he hasn't second-guessed the decision once. Key Takeaways Ownership creates opportunities that often aren't visible until after independence. Enterprise value is built by creating a business that can thrive beyond its founder. The first acquisition conversation can be valuable even if no transaction occurs. Cultural alignment may ultimately matter more than valuation when selecting a long-term partner. Independence doesn't eliminate future options—it expands them. Strategic transactions can strengthen outcomes for clients, employees, and owners simultaneously. The goal isn't simply to own a business; it's to create choices for what comes next. https://youtu.be/f7FGLGjBbyo Quotable Moments “The day Oak Hill launched felt like the business had gone public.” “Potential acquirers weren't interested in buying a book. They were interested in buying a business.” “Ownership isn't simply about control. It's about creating optionality.” “The fear of leaving is almost always worse than the actual experience of leaving.” FAQs Why did Patrick Larkin merge with Cerity Partners only three years after launching his RIA? Patrick explains that independence changed how he viewed enterprise value. After learning what sophisticated buyers were actually looking for, he intentionally built Oak Hill as a business rather than simply managing for annual profitability. Why does Patrick compare independence to an IPO? Because ownership immediately transformed the economic value of his practice. Rather than participating in an internal succession model, he owned an independent enterprise that carried substantially greater market value. What changed after Patrick became independent? Beyond gaining control, he began making decisions through the lens of enterprise value—investing in advisors, systems, and infrastructure that would make the business less dependent on him personally. What made Cerity Partners stand out? Patrick cites the firm's culture, partnership model, meritocracy, long-term vision, and ability to combine local autonomy with enterprise-level capabilities. Is this episode only relevant for advisors considering selling? No. The broader lesson is that ownership creates flexibility. Whether an advisor ultimately remains independent or joins another organization, understanding how enterprise value is created can influence decisions from day one. What is the biggest lesson Patrick hopes advisors take away? That independence isn't simply about leaving a firm. It's about creating the ability to choose what comes next on your own terms. Patrick explains that independence changed how he viewed enterprise value. After learning what sophisticated buyers were actually looking for, he intentionally built Oak Hill as a business rather than simply managing for annual profitability. Because ownership immediately transformed the economic value of his practice. Rather than participating in an internal succession model, he owned an independent enterprise that carried substantially greater market value. Beyond gaining control, he began making decisions through the lens of enterprise value—investing in advisors, systems, and infrastructure that would make the business less dependent on him personally. Patrick cites the firm's culture, partnership model, meritocracy, long-term vision, and ability to combine local autonomy with enterprise-level capabilities. No. The broader lesson is that ownership creates flexibility. Whether an advisor ultimately remains independent or joins another organization, understanding how enterprise value is created can influence decisions from day one. That independence isn't simply about leaving a firm. It's about creating the ability to choose what comes next on your own terms. Related Resources From Start-Up to $31B Behemoth RIA: The Catalysts Behind the Growth of Mega-Firm Cerity Partners Ownership Matters: What Advisors Need to Know When Evaluating Firms Top Tips for Setting Your Business Up for Success Years Before a Move Patrick LarkinPartner and Practice Leader Patrick is a Partner and Practice Leader in the Lansdowne, VA office. He is a member of the Lansdowne Practice, where he works closely with families, foundations, and non-profits to help them define and achieve their financial goals with clarity and confidence. With a deep specialization in retirement income distribution planning and complex risk and wealth management strategies, Patrick is known for helping clients simplify complicated financial decisions, reduce uncertainty, and build sustainable, long-term plans. His approach emphasizes fiduciary responsibility, transparency, and personalized guidance — ensuring clients always feel informed and empowered. Prior to joining Cerity Partners, Patrick was the founding member of Oak Hill Wealth Advisors, where he built a highly respected independent advisory practice that earned the trust of families, professionals, and mission-driven organizations across the region. His leadership was instrumental in shaping a client-first culture that continues today. Patrick's work is rooted in a passion for long-term relationships — guiding clients not just through markets, but through life's milestones such as retirement, business transitions, philanthropic planning, and wealth transfer across generations. He takes pride in being both a strategic advisor and a steady partner to the people he serves. Patrick lives in Bluemont, VA, with his wife Angela, their two children, Paige and Sean, and their Golden Retrievers, Huckleberry and Genoa. Outside of the office, Patrick and his family enjoy an active lifestyle — whether it's hiking and backpacking on the Appalachian Trail, biking the Great Allegheny Passage, or sailing on the Chesapeake Bay. These experiences reflect his belief in balance, resilience, and enjoying the journey — values he also brings to his work with clients. NOTE: The views and opinions expressed by the guests on this podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Diamond Consultants. Neither Diamond Consultants nor the guests on this podcast are compensated in any way for their participation. View the transcript of this episode… Build, Grow & Transact: From Breakaway to Transaction in 3 Years A conversation with Louis Diamond and Patrick Larkin, Partner & Practice Leader at Cerity Partners. Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Build, Grow & Transact: From Breakaway to Transaction in 3 Years. It’s a conversation with Patrick Larkin, Partner and Practice Leader at Cerity Partners. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is The Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education-driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning, data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond: Ownership as a way of creating opportunities you can’t always predict. That’s exactly why we created our Build, Grow, and Transact series. Independence isn’t the end of the story. It’s often the beginning of thinking differently about enterprise value, optionality, and what comes next. Today’s guest is Patrick Larkin, Partner and Practice Leader at Cerity Partners, and formerly the founder of Oak Hill Wealth Advisors. Patrick spent nearly 15 years building a successful practice at A.G. Edwards, Wachovia, and eventually Wells Fargo before launching his own independent firm in 2022. Just three years later, he merged that firm into Cerity. At first glance, that timeline might seem surprisingly short, but as you’ll hear, the merger wasn’t a change in direction. It was the result of seeing his business differently once he owned it. Yet, it’s this perspective that really brings that thought home. Patrick said the day Oak Hill launched felt like the business had gone public because overnight, what had been viewed as a book of business became an enterprise with substantially greater value, some four to five times the value of what it was worth at Wells. And that realization changed the way he invested, the way he hired, and ultimately the way he thought about the future. Pat and I also talk about something advisors don’t often discuss candidly, what life actually looks like after a merger. How much control do you give up? What changes day to day? How do you know whether you’re joining a partner or simply selling a business? Whether your long-term plan is to remain independent forever or eventually join a larger organization, Patrick’s experience is a reminder that ownership isn’t simply about control. It’s about creating optionality and putting yourself in a position where the next decision is yours to make. So let’s get to it. Patrick, thanks for coming on our show today. Patrick Larkin: Oh, my pleasure. Nice to meet you, Louis. Louis Diamond: You too. So let’s start off basically how we start every interview. Tell us about yourself, your background, and how you found your way into our industry in the first place. Patrick Larkin: Yeah, thank you for asking. I knew I always wanted to be a financial advisor. That part really wasn’t in question, but upon graduating college and being a 22-year-old, I knew that it was probably not practical to walk in and start advising people my parents’ age with their life savings. Probably wasn’t going to be a recipe for success. So I took a quick tour through the pharmaceutical industry first, which ended up being unexpectedly valuable. My employers there pushed me to think like an entrepreneur and within our territories. And honestly, that mindset never left me. It shaped how I built everything that came after. Eventually, an opportunity presented itself in Loudoun County, Virginia in Northern Virginia, and I became an FA trainee with A.G. Edwards, absolutely fantastic firm to start my career. Now, what drew me to this career was pretty simple. I felt like it was one of the professions that we had an opportunity to do so much good for others while simultaneously also doing well for yourself, and those two things aren’t in conflict. I also really loved the idea that in this profession there was no hiding. You don’t get paid to show up. You get paid for what you actually do. And perhaps for me, what was most important, I loved the weight of responsibility. I loved earning people’s trust. I loved the idea of deserving, being deserving of their trust, and being a steward of what they’ve worked a lifetime to build. I never took that lightly, and I still don’t. Louis Diamond: That’s amazing. Yeah, I mean, the number of people I’ve heard, you talked so fondly about A.G. Edwards and there’s a bunch of other firms that have since been absorbed or emerged that are like the regional firms of old. So not surprised to hear you loved it. A.G. Edwards, obviously, became Wells Fargo Advisors or was acquired or merged with Wells Fargo. So I know you’re at Wells and A.G. Edwards until 2022. So give us a quick version. How’d you build your practice from the pharma world into being in FA? Patrick Larkin: Yeah, so as I started with A.G. Edwards, I came in at really just the perfect time. It was towards the end of the financial crisis. And I built the business the old-fashioned way with a lot of cold calling and eventually did some dinner seminars, which I can tell you is a very expensive way to learn how to speak in front of a room. But I made some progress, and I was also in a great office, small enough that some of the advisors there would hand off some of the smaller accounts that they weren’t interested in working with, and got an opportunity to get a lot of reps in working with real life clients and individuals. I knew early on I didn’t have enough talent to win on talent alone, so I made up for it and compensated for that with really hard work. The real turning point came for me when A.G. Edwards was first acquired by Wachovia Securities, and that was about five years into my career. And at that point, my branch manager, who was eyeing retirement, asked me to step in as her partner, and that changed everything. We eventually moved over to a Wachovia Securities office, another really great local office in Loudoun County, Virginia. And from that office, I worked on and became a CIMA, a CFP, worked with the clients, built a business through referrals. And I found at that point in my career when I would go to a meeting with Wachovia, eventually Wells Fargo, as a young 30-year-old, I would look around the room often and realize that I was the youngest person in the room. The funny thing was 10 years later, I would go into that same room and I’d look around and I still was the youngest guy in that room. And those demographics in our industry, and when I came into our industry, ultimately led that office that I worked in with Wells Fargo Advisors, I eventually was the recipient and party to five different succession plans- Louis Diamond: Wow. Patrick Larkin: … at Wells Fargo Advisors. I hoped that I had built a reputation as somebody that these other advisors would entrust with their clients. And over that time period, really, I would say professionally, one of my accomplishments I’m most proud of is all five of those retired advisors that I used to work with, who had an opportunity to see me work with clients, all became clients of mine, I still continue to work with. And it’s professionally just one of the greatest honors that I’ve ever had. Louis Diamond: I mean, that’s a large number of advisors you helped sunset, but I would agree it’s the ultimate proof of concept that they not only trusted you with their clients and their life’s work, but now also with their family’s wealth. So I like that, kind of the full life cycle there. So I’m curious, though, you stayed at Wells through a really turbulent time through the fake bank scandal. There’s a lot of attrition. I mean, obviously, they’re still a powerhouse to this day, but what kept you at Wells for as long as it did before you left in 2022? Patrick Larkin: You described it as a turbulent time. Pretty turbulent might be an understatement. Even before Wells, the transition to Wells, Wachovia Bank had been the first company that we transitioned to from A.G. Edwards. And we, of course, went through the financial crisis during that time period and handholding our clients and helping them get through that time period and dealing with concerns that we shouldn’t really have to be prepared with. “Is my money safe? It’s not what’s happening to the market, but is my money safe in your institution?” But once things stabilized, I found real purpose in partnering with some of the retiring advisors and opportunities that came up. It was a really wonderful climate and atmosphere in our local office. It was really a family-like atmosphere, and I still had a lot to learn. And all those advisors that I partnered with, I’ve joked I’ve never had an original idea in my entire life. I stole all my good ideas from them. And some of them were really ahead of their time, and I learned, adopted, and built my own philosophies by working closely with them. Ultimately, by the time I left Wells Fargo, I was finishing up the fifth sunset program and had only made my way halfway through the sunset before the opportunity presented itself to create my own practice. Louis Diamond: So I’m curious, when did you first seriously start thinking about leaving and what really tipped the scales for you? What was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back? Patrick Larkin: Yeah, it really was a number of small items and ultimately one big one. But for a long time, I’d been content, but as I tried to grow the business beyond what I could do individually, I felt like I kept running into walls. There were it felt like limitations on how I could build out my team and structure the practice the way I envisioned it. Additionally, there were some new policies that also started to bother me. One of them was the platform advisory fee, which in my eyes was less about client transparency and more about replacing a declining revenue source on the firm’s balance sheet. And after dealing with clients and helping them through the bank scandal at the firm, I was concerned that this would come back and hurt me and the relationships that I had with my clients. Incidentally, I just recently onboarded a new client that transferred to us. And for them, looking at their statement, identifying this platform advisory fee- Louis Diamond: Oh boy. Patrick Larkin: … was the last straw for them before they moved about 15 million of assets to us. Also, I thought I would be I would be a better allocator of resources than Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo retained about half of the revenue that I earned for the business. They seemed to think that the best allocation of that money was additional middle management. Whereas, I thought investment in technology, investment in additional personnel, and an investment in marketing were best places to continue to build out my vision. The final straw, and really a thing that crystallized everything for me was when I read a book in 2021 called The Infinite Game, a book written by Simon Sinek. Chapter eight, the title is Ethical Fading. And it uses the Wells Fargo bank scandal as a case study in what happens when a firm loses its moral compass. I read the chapter and thought, “There it is, I have to do something.” That was really the final push I needed. I mentioned earlier I was very fortunate to start my career with a company called A.G. Edwards, a regional brokerage firm. And while I was at A.G. Edwards, there was a research report that came out on A.G. Edwards as a company. And I’m going to paraphrase a little bit on what was said in that report, but ultimately there was a line in there, and it was a criticism, but I took it as a huge positive as being an employee there. The line said, “While management does not necessarily say it, we believe the client is put ahead of the shareholder.” And that was something I was very proud of. And I just, upon reflecting on it, felt confident those were words that I never was going to see go to print about Wells Fargo. Louis Diamond: So you left Wells in 2022 and founded Oak Hill Wealth Partners in Lansdowne, Virginia. Walk us through that decision. Why go independent rather than going to another firm? Patrick Larkin: I really thought moving to another firm, the things that I had grown frustrated with at Wells Fargo Advisors, I would also find at another wirehouse firm. I was ready, and honestly, the simple answer is I thought I could do better. And I wanted control after having what I felt like was very little control. I had grown frustrated with others making important decisions, and I wanted an opportunity to grab the reins and make decisions on my own. I believe at that time, the future of wealth management was going to be built around fiduciary advice, and I didn’t want to watch that from the sidelines anymore. I was watching what was happening in the industry. And as we were trying to hire new advisors, reaching out to college graduates who were studying CFP programs, identified that they were more inclined to want to start employment with an RIA than a wirehouse. What made the timing work really well was Wells Fargo had actually introduced a program to help advisors in the private client group spin off and establish their own RIAs. Now, whenever I tell this to another advisor, particularly ones that are wirehouses, they can’t understand it. And quite frankly, I don’t understand why they helped us do it, but we were about the 30th practice that they helped us through this process and they provided real support. They hired consultants, made vendor recommendations, even referrals to financing so I could pay off my last succession plan before I left. The only really upside for Wells Fargo was that the ask was that we continue to use First Clearing as the custodian. And one of the downsides for me was I was going to leave all of my deferred comp behind with Wells Fargo. Now, all clients had to do to join me was sign a positive consent. And on May 9th, 2020, we turned on our computers in our new office and our clients were already there. That same day, we launched and started a relationship with Charles Schwab. And it was so exciting to be able to start shopping for what I thought was the best FinTech, really feeling like I was stuck with proprietary tools that Wells Fargo advisors had offered. I felt like I was a kid in a candy store. And if there was a cool tool that I identified that would help us serve our clients better, I was all in and I was buying it. I really feel that some of the technology that Oak Hill eventually bought into and some of the tools we’re using now are going to take years and years before they eventually trickle down to where the wirehouses are, if ever. Louis Diamond: Interesting. So it was really it was for the most part an internal move from one- Patrick Larkin: It was- Louis Diamond: … channel to the other. Patrick Larkin: … it was an internal move, but there was no requirement to stay at First Clearing. As a fiduciary, they couldn’t make those demands. And again, they helped us with the financing, which is really unusual that they helped us secure a loan so I could pay off the last retiring advisor. It’s really unusual that a bank will loan money where there is no business at the time, but because of previous experience that financial institution had working with Wells, they helped us facilitate the transaction. And the program is still in place at Wells Fargo, which is absolutely amazing to me after the experience that I’ve just had myself. Louis Diamond: Yeah, it’s interesting. I mean, does it cannibalize a more profitable revenue source? Sure. But if the alternative was all the assets go to Schwab or Fidelity, to me, honestly, it’s smart. I think they played the long game by not being adversarial on it. Patrick Larkin: I think they played a long game and they took the philosophy, and I think they use it as a recruiting tool that if you love them, set them free. And that’s exactly what they did. Louis Diamond: So for the rest of the episode, I want to talk about your eventual, and not that long period of time, transaction or decision to merge Oak Hill with Cerity Partners. This is our Build, Grow, Transact subseries. And I was really struck by your story because you were three years or so into running Oak Hill, and then your merger with Cerity Partners, an amazing RIA closed. That’s a fairly short runway. Usually when I see folks go independent for the first time, it’s 10, 15, 20 years, maybe never, that they decide to merge or sell. I’m curious to understand your thinking about the transaction. Were you looking to do something? Or was it just like right place, right time and the opportunity presented itself? Patrick Larkin: I had started Oak Hill with the intent of eventually down the road, much closer to retirement, looking for a partner. The opportunity and what I learned early on helped change that idea and philosophy, and I adapted and made modifications to take advantage of it. Louis Diamond: Interesting. So you weren’t necessarily planning on selling or merging the business, it just kind of circumstances happened the way they did? Patrick Larkin: Yeah. When we started Oak Hill Wealth Advisors, it was a really pretty short period of time before we started getting calls from larger national RIAs about potential acquisition, much sooner than I expected. Early on, I just brushed them off, but about a year in, I took one of those calls and it really just opened my eyes up. I realized for the first time this small firm, this little practice actually had some real value, way more than I’d given it credit for. That first call, that first exploration didn’t go anywhere. It wasn’t a good fit. But what it gave me was a much clearer picture of what the serious acquirers were actually looking for. And that changed decisions I made at Oak Hill going forward. I really at that point stopped trying to optimize for near-term profit and really thought of my business as a business and started building towards enterprise value, sometimes at the cost of short-term income. And that turned out to be exactly the right call. Louis Diamond: That’s such an interesting perspective. Let’s double-click into that concept. So it sounds almost counterintuitive that if you kind of had this light bulb moment that like, “Okay, maybe I want to transact my business sooner than I initially thought.” I think most people would say, “Let’s become lean and mean. Let’s become as profitable as possible so my EBITDA’s higher.” But you took the different approach. What were the decisions you did to invest more in enterprise value rather than current cash flow? Patrick Larkin: A true business is one that doesn’t need me to be here every day to operate. And when we left Wells Fargo Advisors, it was myself and one other advisor that created Oak Hill Wealth Advisors. I was responsible for about 95% of the assets and revenue. And one of the more significant investments we made is in additional advisors. I recruited three new advisors, all CFPs, to join Oak Hill Wealth Advisors. Whereas, before I had been largely managing all the relationships myself. For someone that kind of grew up in the regional wirehouse space, it’s pretty counterintuitive to start moving relationships away from you onto other advisors. You’re trained and built to create a moat around your relationships, and realized that the potential acquirers are not interested, at least the ones I was interested in, weren’t interested in buying a book. They were interested in buying a business. And that just meant every decision we made going forward was not profit-driven, but how can I increase the value of the business? So after that first call, I knew I probably would be looking to move forward with a transaction sooner as opposed to the end of retirement. That information that I got on that first call helped me realize that when Oak Hill Wealth Advisors opened its doors on May 9th, 2022, we effectively had an IPO. I had great familiarity with how the succession plans at Wells Fargo Advisors worked. And on that day that we opened our practice, the value of my business jumped to be four to five times the value of it in a succession plan at Wells Fargo Advisors. Now, I knew going forward that I was going to be able to increase revenue. I was going to be able to increase EBITDA. I was going to potentially have some benefits from a market tailwind. I knew the multiples of EBITDA that the firms use may fluctuate, but the biggest change by far occurred leaving the wirehouse and having the value of my business grow four to fivefold in that same day. So what I really focused on was making sure that I was going to, when I was ready to start looking again after I had worked on improving the practice, really was going to look for a firm that was going to be a good cultural fit for both my clients, my team, and myself. Louis Diamond: That’s such a cool perspective. I’ve never heard anyone say that the day we launched your independent business was like an IPO. But honestly, it’s so true. You’re planting a flag in the ground that like, “Here is real value. This is value that we’ve created that we own rather than it being a book of business and a W-2 paycheck.” And it’s a fascinating perspective. Patrick Larkin: Yep. It really is amazing that the value changed that much on one day and the future value changes. Looking at the equity that I owned in Oak Hill Wealth Advisors, it made sense to consider is there a better way to take some risk off the table for myself and my family and diversify some of the equity that I had in Oak Hill Wealth Advisors with a larger enterprise? Louis Diamond: It makes complete sense. Obviously, everyone would sign up for 4 to 5X increase in value. Patrick Larkin: Sure. Louis Diamond: That’s not the reason most people go independent, but it’s important to know. And also, what I really liked about what you shared is I think a really valuable learning for anyone is those calls come in, whether it’s from annoying people like me or from an acquirer, from a firm, they’re not all noise. You took it as an opportunity to learn. Even though that first person who called wasn’t the right fit, it crystallized something in your mind and it let you make proactive decisions that ultimately paid off in spades when it came time to sign the dotted line for your transaction with Cerity. So I think it’s brilliant. And it’s very big picture, big-business-owner-type stuff that I think a lot of people will just filter out because it’s annoying and I’m young, I’m not looking to sell, but that was the journey. Patrick Larkin: Yeah, that first call changed my opinion about timing of when to move forward with a partnership. Originally, I thought this would be something at the end of retirement. The timing of doing so sooner seemed a lot more appealing after having that conversation and realizing what we had actually built. Louis Diamond: Amazing. So ultimately you decided to merge with Cerity Partners. We’ve had Kurt Miscinski from Cerity Partners on the show. They’re a real heavyweight within the RIA world. Most recently, they were valued at $8 billion in a recap, and it’s a very impressive firm. What specifically drew you to Cerity versus other potential buyers? Like you said, you got a lot of calls. Patrick Larkin: After that first call, I just got to work and focused on continuing to take care of our clients, building a team, adding new advisors, being a mentor to those advisors. But at the same time, we were being approached fairly regularly by that point. And I had a pretty good system for quickly deciding whether something was worth a second look, and most weren’t. But about a year ago, one of the national RIAs caught my attention and I started having conversations with them. And once I had progressed with them, I though, “You know what? If I’m giving this consideration, I really need to cast a wider net.” So I reached out to other RIAs that I had looked at and admired and been keeping an eye on. And ultimately, my longtime business coach, Barbara Kay, suggested I talk with Cerity Partners, a company that one of her other clients had just recently joined. And from the very first call, I could tell something was different. And I talked to many different companies. Cerity Partners, and an individual I spoke with, Geoff Newman, they weren’t leading with valuation formulas or deal structure. They were asking questions about my clients, my team, and how I actually ran the practice. They had a very defined process for identifying partners who were genuinely compatible, not just advisors with books that were transferable. And that distinction mattered greatly to me. They also offered really, in my opinion, the right balance of support and still having some autonomy. And their aspiration to deliver consistent standard of care to clients, whether they be in California or Virginia, so that those individuals get the same quality of experience, resonated with how I was already running things within my practice. That combination of support and autonomy, I really liked the idea of continuing to have oversight over my local practice, over our practice, which included the budget, salaries, and bonuses. It more than anybody else felt like a partnership and not a buyout. And I really appreciate it during that first call, Cerity was the only company that talked about a hundred-year plan. It was amazing to me to hear what their thoughts were. Most of the other firms I spoke with talked about valuations. And very quickly in the process, I found myself on a Zoom call with a Patagonia fleece vest-wearing private equity rep walking me through a valuation. And it was efficient, but it was not a cultural fit for me. And the infrastructure behind us and the combination of autonomy is really harder to find than most people think. As I progressed with Cerity, I remember early on in the process thinking to myself, “My God, I hope they want me, I hope they want me,” because I could tell I’m a very process-driven person They had a process with the way they brought me on board. And ultimately, we had a due diligence trip set up to go to one of their larger offices where I met with one of their leaders, Claire O’Keefe, part of their practice development, and had an opportunity to meet with different leaders within the firm and really get my arms wrapped around the potential that they had. Just the quality of the people I encountered through the whole process just kept reinforcing the decision. And by the time we got to the finish line, it didn’t feel like a transaction. It felt like I was joining something that I was excited to be part of. So just a little bit more about what attracted me to Cerity, their culture is just phenomenal. Cerity Partners uses the word “meritocracy” and they actually mean it. Ownership and influence here track your contribution, not your tenure or how well you play the politics. I just attended my first partner meeting in April, and without exaggeration, it was the most extraordinary professional meeting I’ve attended in my 25-year career. During the meeting, there was open debate about the direction of the firm, and every voice in the room carried weight. You could feel the culture. And that type of culture is built over years. You can’t fake it. Everyone in the room it felt like was rowing in the same direction. And by the time the meeting was over, I was so excited to get back to my team and tell them about what I had just witnessed, I wasn’t looking for the exit. I was looking for the brick wall to run through. I was so excited. And every once in a while I wonder having spent so much time in the wirehouse spaces, the bar just set really low for me when I talked to some of my other colleagues that have been independent for a long time. But it was just an absolutely amazing experience. And I do want to just add, one of the last really important things to me about Cerity Partners is I’ve been very fortunate with my career and in this profession. And part of my goal over the rest of my career is to have a legacy. And my legacy currently exists with the families I’ve advised and the team that I’ve built and have served and led. But Cerity Partners is helping me achieve even a greater legacy in our industry with our shared long-term goals. During my first meeting, they talked about their hundred-year vision of being a worldwide employee-owned professional services firm. And currently, and this is very exciting, the employees are the largest shareholder of the firm. No one else I talked to talked about their long-term goals like this, and it’s a vision I believe in. I want to contribute to help to see it accomplished. And one day when I do retire, I want to look back and see how I contribute it to a company that I believe is going to change the direction of professional wealth management. Louis Diamond: Wow. Patrick Larkin: My partnership with Cerity Partners is going to make that a reality. It’s just an amazing place. Yeah, very happy. Louis Diamond: Honestly, you can’t fake that type of enthusiasm. It sounds like- Patrick Larkin: It’s not- Louis Diamond: … you entered into a transaction, which is it’s like jumping into the deep end. How do you sort through what’s the sales process versus what’s real? How much of this is actually going to translate to my life? But hearing you not that long after the transaction, you still feel that and it’s very cool. In the press release I read, you cited estate planning, private markets access, and cross-border planning as key reasons for the merger. Can you talk about what it was about those? Maybe- Patrick Larkin: Yeah. Louis Diamond: … anything else that was missed? Patrick Larkin: Yeah. Louis Diamond: And were those not things that you felt like you could have delivered yourself as a standalone? Patrick Larkin: I thought that they were going to help me be able to be more effective in delivering those, but they weren’t the complete picture. The capabilities that we cited in the release were genuine gaps I wanted to fill and have available for clients and be able to prospect and go after new additional clients. But being fully honest, there were also deeper drivers. One was my team. Sometimes we get emotional about this. Being someone who’s trusted is really important to me, and that’s something I hold in high priority. There are people that followed me out of Wells Fargo to join me. One of my client associates had delayed her retirement so that she could join me and help us launch for the first three months. One of my other client associates has been with me close to 15 years. These are people that trusted me to do the right thing and to make sure that I wasn’t walking them off the plank. Being able to join Cerity Partners and give them a future that didn’t hinge entirely on my personal longevity was a huge relief. And Cerity Partners is an ownership culture. I’m so happy to say today that every single individual on my team in our practice in Lansdowne is now either an equity owner in Cerity Partners or very shortly will be an equity- Louis Diamond: So cool. Patrick Larkin: … equity owner. So they have a stake as well in what they’re building. It matters. My youngest client associate noticed how much it costs to send to FedEx. And he goes, “Now that I’m an owner, maybe we should rethink about sending regular mail.” Another driver was my family. And I’ve always had the philosophy of trying to prioritize and clients first, team and colleagues, and then my family. And I’ve always made decisions that if I put those others before myself, eventually I’ll be taken care of. And going through this transaction, it was so generous to my family and provided such security. There was a little bit of guilt that, “Am I doing this for all the right reasons?” But being able to secure my family’s future, converting equity in a three-year-old RIA into a stake of a $8 billion-plus valuation with institutional backing, that was a meaningful moment and I’d be less than honest if I glossed over that. I also really wanted to be part of something larger than myself. And the opportunity to help build a legacy in this business with Cerity Partners really gives me the platform to do that. Louis Diamond: Very cool. I can tell that you’re genuine, not just because of the way you sound, the way you’re speaking, but in the very beginning of the episode, you talked about the reason you got into this business was because you thought it gave you the dual purpose of being able to help people, but also being able to enrich yourself or your family. So this answer, it comes full circle. You’re able to accomplish all these goals, which made it the right decision. And I think, look, I say to advisors all the time, “You’re allowed to be greedy, you’re allowed to be selfish as long as the clients are still in the front of your mind as the most important thing.” There’s nothing wrong with doing better for clients, building a legacy in your case, but also reaping the rewards of all your hard work and labor and also all the risks that you’ve taken over your career. I got to ask you, though, from being an employee of Wells, where you were running your team, for the most part, you can run the business within their guardrails the way you want, to then running an RIA, which is really like you’re fully in control of everything, to now being a partner, but you’re not the one who has the name on the door anymore. Patrick Larkin: Right, right. Louis Diamond: Well, how do you think about the giving up control and full ownership of your practice versus owning a very small amount of a much larger entity? Patrick Larkin: There was such continuity. Oak Hill Wealth Advisors and Cerity Partners were so philosophically aligned that I genuinely never felt like I was giving up anything that I wasn’t glad to let go. My wife joined the business shortly before I left Wells Fargo Advisors. And still to this day, on my drive home from work, I call her up and say, “You’re not going to believe this.” And it’s all a positive, good thing. So Cerity has struck the perfect balance of that autonomy and support combination that I was looking for. So I still have control and a say over the way our practice is managed. Very shortly after the merger, my supervisor came down and met me for the first time, and we went out together after the day had ended. And early in the conversation I said to him, “What can I do to make your life easier?” And he said, “Pat, what can I do to make your life easier?” And that set the tone that still exists to this day. I almost cried when he said that because that was so different than what I had experienced up to that point. So the collaboration, the way we work together, it’s just absolutely amazing. And not once for a single moment have I second-guessed my decision. And it’s really weird because I’ve now been part of this organization for nearly nine months, and there just has not been one thing that’s occurred where I said, “That’s a disappointment.” It’s just been absolutely amazing every single day. Louis Diamond: Very cool. To me, there’s different arcs of when you want to ask people the question of, “Hey, any regrets?” And usually you don’t want to ask them too soon because they’re still going through the transition and integration and growing pains. And you don’t want to ask them too far in the future because you forget about what was life before. To be this short of a duration into this new partnership and to have these feelings, that’s absolutely pretty special. I got two more questions for you, Pat, if you don’t mind. Patrick Larkin: Sure. Louis Diamond: First one, economically, to me, one of the hardest things for really any advisor to really grapple with or to fully comprehend or make their own is, “I own 100% of the equity in my business. I get to decide when I want to sell in the future. My business is growing 10% per year. I wait to sell until 10 years from now, my business is going to be much bigger and I get to keep all the cash flow. I get to make all the decisions.” That compared to the path that you took, which was take cash off the table, which everyone understands, to, “Now, I own a much smaller piece of a much larger pie.” How would you talk to someone about the financial trade-off between a hundred percent ownership in their business, full control, full discretion over everything, versus becoming a minority equity partner in a larger entity? Patrick Larkin: You have to look at the valuation of my business, again, the day that we opened our doors as Oak Hill Wealth Advisors. There was such a massive jump in the value of the business. There was not going to be an opportunity for an appreciation at that level. So then, you have to compare what the growth rate is of Oak Hill Wealth Advisors versus a Cerity Partners. And I’m not embarrassed to say that Cerity Partners is and has been growing at a much faster rate of return. The value of the equity that I have retained in Cerity Partners, my ownership stake, I fully expect by the time I transact that business as I get closer to retirement, that’s going to be worth many times more than whatever opportunity I would have had at Wells Fargo with the valuation they would have provided me. Nevermind, very important, the tax consequences of a structure like this is all the retiring advisors that I worked with were taxed at their highest marginal rate. I owned a business and we were taxed at long-term capital gains rates. A significant difference in savings in what as the owner we actually realize. So yeah, I feel very comfortable with the ownership that I have and the control and continued opportunity with the meritocracy culture to increase my share of ownership in the company. Louis Diamond: Okay, and let’s do one more question here. I’ll pick it back up. So Pat, I think it’s a really cool perspective. It’s almost do your homework, and if you find the right horse and the right jockey that can run faster than you can on your own, that the equity value will compound and grow and appreciate in a faster, more efficient way than what you’re doing on your own, which makes complete sense. It’s the ultimate trade-off. And again, it’s like jumping into the deep end. On the one hand, Oak Hill was all you, right? You control the growth, for better or worse, for the good days, the bad days, the good years, the bad years, versus now your growth is diversified amongst hundreds of partners across M&A, across different lead flow channels, et cetera. It makes complete sense. But honestly, if I were an advisor, I don’t know how I would think about it. I think it’s all just fact-and-circumstance-based on where I am in my life and who the firm is and what I’m trying to accomplish. But it’s such a cool perspective because usually the playbook that we see, which is why we did this series, is go independent and there’s a long pause until there is a realization of all the value that’s been created. So seeing you do this in a much quicker timeframe, it seems like it was the absolutely right decision. To me, it just is another path, another way that an advisor or a firm is able to think about their future. Any final advice or parting words for someone who is sitting right where you were in 2021 or 2022 thinking about making the leap? And we’ll say a transition in general, or really anything you want to share to wrap our episode here. Patrick Larkin: Thank you for having me, and this is a great question. Happy to give a thoughtful answer to it. Before I’d left Wells Fargo Advisors through the program and started Oak Hill Wealth Advisors, I had an opportunity to go through a due diligence process and make sure that this was going to be a right move for me. There was no carrot out there that was obvious. I learned after that first conversation that I had built a practice that had some value to it. I was leaving behind the security of something I knew, leaving behind a significant amount in deferred compensation, and I wanted to make sure I was making the right decision. And through that due diligence process, talked to about five other firms that had recently left Wells Fargo to join this RIA program. I asked them a lot of different questions about what their experience was. And at every point during those conversations, they all said the same thing at different points. And it sounded like this. They said, “I’m working harder than I ever have before, but I wish I had done this sooner.” So my advice to those people, do it. I know that sounds simple, but I mean it. The fear of leaving is almost always worse than the actual experience of leaving. And I understand the inertia of not leaving and the real apprehension of what was on the other side. But what I found was a version of this profession I genuinely didn’t know was possible. One where I could do things the right way on my terms for the people I care most about serving. And not every path is going to look like mine. Some advisors should go fully independent and stay there, and that can be an incredible life. But when it comes time to look for a partner, quite frankly, if Cerity Partners is not on your shortlist, you’re making a significant mistake. And I say that not to sell anything, but because I’ve lived the comparison firsthand and there’s simply nothing else like it. Louis Diamond: So Pat, it’s been really fun, but I don’t think we’ve had anyone on the eight years or so we’ve been doing this show that’s gone through this type of arc or journey that you have. One of my big takeaways or sticking points that this episode brought for me is by going independent and taking control over your future, you created complete optionality for yourself to do exactly what you wanted to do with your business, even if that was different than what you initially planned. So in your case, it was selling within three years of going independent, but by taking action, being proactive, playing some offense, you made the opportunity happen on your terms and your timeline. So this has been fun in so many different ways. I loved your comment about how when you went independent, it’s basically like the day of your IPO, the four-to-five-times increase in value versus an internal succession deal, and even just the way to think about getting equity in a larger entity versus running your own plays only. So thank you so much for doing this. This has been fun. Mindy Diamond: As a financial advisor, you hold yourself to the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and credibility. You are successful because you take your professional responsibility seriously and are dedicated to your clients. But are you living your best business life? Are your goals aligned with your firm’s or could a better option exist? Should I Stay or Should I Go? Is a book written with you in mind? It’s a self-guided journey that walks you through the key steps that we take with our advisor clients. This strategic thought process and roadmap to professional self-discovery is designed to help you ask the right questions and think critically and objectively, whether you’re considering change or not. Learn how to get your copy at diamond-consultants.com/thebook. Build, Grow & Transact: From Breakaway to Transaction in 3 Years A conversation with Louis Diamond and Patrick Larkin, Partner & Practice Leader at Cerity Partners. Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is Build, Grow & Transact: From Breakaway to Transaction in 3 Years. It’s a conversation with Patrick Larkin, Partner and Practice Leader at Cerity Partners. I’m Louis Diamond, and this is The Diamond Podcast for Financial Advisors. Mindy Diamond: At Diamond Consultants, we help elite advisors identify the right environment for their businesses to thrive, whether that’s at a wirehouse, boutique, or independent firm. With nearly three decades of experience, we’ve guided thousands of advisors and represented more than a quarter of a trillion dollars in assets transitioned. And each year, one in four advisors managing a billion dollars or more who change firms are our clients. Our process is education-driven and based on building relationships, starting as your strategic partner well before you’re even thinking of a move. To schedule a confidential conversation, call us at 908-879-1002. Wondering why advisors change firms and where they’re headed? Are transition deals going up or down? Those very questions and more inspired us to create our annual Advisor Transition Report. It’s the award-winning, data-driven resource designed for advisors that connects the dots between the motivations around movement and the firm’s appetite for top talent. Arm yourself with the knowledge you need to make smart decisions. Download your copy at diamond-consultants.com/transitionreport. Louis Diamond: Ownership as a way of creating opportunities you can’t always predict. That’s exactly why we created our Build, Grow, and Transact series. Independence isn’t the end of the story. It’s often the beginning of thinking differently about enterprise value, optionality, and what comes next. Today’s guest is Patrick Larkin, Partner and Practice Leader at Cerity Partners, and formerly the founder of Oak Hill Wealth Advisors. Patrick spent nearly 15 years building a successful practice at A.G. Edwards, Wachovia, and eventually Wells Fargo before launching his own independent firm in 2022. Just three years later, he merged that firm into Cerity. At first glance, that timeline might seem surprisingly short, but as you’ll hear, the merger wasn’t a change in direction. It was the result of seeing his business differently once he owned it. Yet, it’s this perspective that really brings that thought home. Patrick said the day Oak Hill launched felt like the business had gone public because overnight, what had been viewed as a book of business became an enterprise with substantially greater value, some four to five times the value of what it was worth at Wells. And that realization changed the way he invested, the way he hired, and ultimately the way he thought about the future. Pat and I also talk about something advisors don’t often discuss candidly, what life actually looks like after a merger. How much control do you give up? What changes day to day? How do you know whether you’re joining a partner or simply selling a business? Whether your long-term plan is to remain independent forever or eventually join a larger organization, Patrick’s experience is a reminder that ownership isn’t simply about control. It’s about creating optionality and putting yourself in a position where the next decision is yours to make. So let’s get to it. Patrick, thanks for coming on our show today. Patrick Larkin: Oh, my pleasure. Nice to meet you, Louis. Louis Diamond: You too. So let’s start off basically how we start every interview. Tell us about yourself, your background, and how you found your way into our industry in the first place. Patrick Larkin: Yeah, thank you for asking. I knew I always wanted to be a financial advisor. That part really wasn’t in question, but upon graduating college and being a 22-year-old, I knew that it was probably not practical to walk in and start advising people my parents’ age with their life savings. Probably wasn’t going to be a recipe for success. So I took a quick tour through the pharmaceutical industry first, which ended up being unexpectedly valuable. My employers there pushed me to think like an entrepreneur and within our territories. And honestly, that mindset never left me. It shaped how I built everything that came after. Eventually, an opportunity presented itself in Loudoun County, Virginia in Northern Virginia, and I became an FA trainee with A.G. Edwards, absolutely fantastic firm to start my career. Now, what drew me to this career was pretty simple. I felt like it was one of the professions that we had an opportunity to do so much good for others while simultaneously also doing well for yourself, and those two things aren’t in conflict. I also really loved the idea that in this profession there was no hiding. You don’t get paid to show up. You get paid for what you actually do. And perhaps for me, what was most important, I loved the weight of responsibility. I loved earning people’s trust. I loved the idea of deserving, being deserving of their trust, and being a steward of what they’ve worked a lifetime to build. I never took that lightly, and I still don’t. Louis Diamond: That’s amazing. Yeah, I mean, the number of people I’ve heard, you talked so fondly about A.G. Edwards and there’s a bunch of other firms that have since been absorbed or emerged that are like the regional firms of old. So not surprised to hear you loved it. A.G. Edwards, obviously, became Wells Fargo Advisors or was acquired or merged with Wells Fargo. So I know you’re at Wells and A.G. Edwards until 2022. So give us a quick version. How’d you build your practice from the pharma world into being in FA? Patrick Larkin: Yeah, so as I started with A.G. Edwards, I came in at really just the perfect time. It was towards the end of the financial crisis. And I built the business the old-fashioned way with a lot of cold calling and eventually did some dinner seminars, which I can tell you is a very expensive way to learn how to speak in front of a room. But I made some progress, and I was also in a great office, small enough that some of the advisors there would hand off some of the smaller accounts that they weren’t interested in working with, and got an opportunity to get a lot of reps in working with real life clients and individuals. I knew early on I didn’t have enough talent to win on talent alone, so I made up for it and compensated for that with really hard work. The real turning point came for me when A.G. Edwards was first acquired by Wachovia Securities, and that was about five years into my career. And at that point, my branch manager, who was eyeing retirement, asked me to step in as her partner, and that changed everything. We eventually moved over to a Wachovia Securities office, another really great local office in Loudoun County, Virginia. And from that office, I worked on and became a CIMA, a CFP, worked with the clients, built a business through referrals. And I found at that point in my career when I would go to a meeting with Wachovia, eventually Wells Fargo, as a young 30-year-old, I would look around the room often and realize that I was the youngest person in the room. The funny thing was 10 years later, I would go into that same room and I’d look around and I still was the youngest guy in that room. And those demographics in our industry, and when I came into our industry, ultimately led that office that I worked in with Wells Fargo Advisors, I eventually was the recipient and party to five different succession plans- Louis Diamond: Wow. Patrick Larkin: … at Wells Fargo Advisors. I hoped that I had built a reputation as somebody that these other advisors would entrust with their clients. And over that time period, really, I would say professionally, one of my accomplishments I’m most proud of is all five of those retired advisors that I used to work with, who had an opportunity to see me work with clients, all became clients of mine, I still continue to work with. And it’s professionally just one of the greatest honors that I’ve ever had. Louis Diamond: I mean, that’s a large number of advisors you helped sunset, but I would agree it’s the ultimate p
July CPI data was tame, but PPI this morning provides a look at wholesale prices. Results could affect yields after Fed rate hike odds fell Wednesday. Retail sales are due Friday. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Rising oil and stubbornly high yields sent stocks down Tuesday for the fourth session in five as investors await today's CPI data. Headline CPI is seen at 0.1%, with core at 0.2%. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Trading Activity Index (STAX) is a proprietary, behavior-based index created by Charles Schwab designed to indicate the sentiment of retail investors' portfolios. It measures what investors are actually doing, and how they are actually positioned in the markets. Historical data should not be used alone when making investment decisions. The STAX is not a tradable index. The STAX should not be used as an indicator or predictor of future client trading volume or financial performance for Schwab. © 2026 Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. All rights reserved. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Join Downtown Josh Brown and Michael Batnick for another episode of What Are Your Thoughts as they discuss six major stocks that may be setting up for a bounce: Meta, Uber, Netflix, Disney, Nike, and Home Depot. Plus, Nvidia's latest data center financing deal and the rise of compute as an investable asset class, why stocks like Schwab, Expedia, and Booking are hitting all-time highs despite fears that AI would disrupt their businesses, and the $1.5 billion rescue deal for United Wholesale Mortgage after a massive loss on interest-rate hedges.Josh makes the case for Expedia, Michael brings the Mystery Chart, and much more! This episode is sponsored by Betterment Advisor Solutions. Learn more at https://betterment.com/advisors Sign up for The Compound Newsletter and never miss out! Instagram: https://instagram.com/thecompoundnews Twitter: https://twitter.com/thecompoundnews LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-compound-media/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thecompoundnews Investing involves the risk of loss. This podcast is for informational purposes only and should not be or regarded as personalized investment advice or relied upon for investment decisions. Michael Batnick and Josh Brown are employees of Ritholtz Wealth Management and may maintain positions in the securities discussed in this video. All opinions expressed by them are solely their own opinion and do not reflect the opinion of Ritholtz Wealth Management. The Compound Media, Incorporated, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here https://ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. Any mention of a particular security and related performance data is not a recommendation to buy or sell that security. The information provided on this website (including any information that may be accessed through this website) is not directed at any investor or category of investors and is provided solely as general information. Obviously nothing on this channel should be considered as personalized financial advice or a solicitation to buy or sell any securities. See our disclosures here: https://ritholtzwealth.com/podcast-youtube-disclosures/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Re-release | In honor of the publication of the paperback edition of Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil, we're re-releasing this conversation with V.E. Schwab Host Jason Blitman welcomes bestselling author Victoria "V.E." Schwab for a conversation about her remarkable milestone—her 25th book, Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil. They discuss the profound power of names, exploring how identity shapes both fantasy storytelling and LGBTQIA+ narratives, the impact of representation in literature, and the moment that nearly drove Schwab to walk away from writing altogether. VICTORIA “V. E.” SCHWAB is the #1 New York Times bestselling author of more than twenty books. Schwab's series and standalone titles for readers of all ages have made her a major literary figure, whose notable works include the Villains series, the Shades of Magic universe, The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue, and Bury Our Bones in the Midnight Soil. When not haunting Paris streets or writing in the corner of her favorite coffee shop, she lives in Edinburgh, Scotland.SUBSTACK! MERCH! WATCH! CONTACT! hello@gaysreading.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Though tomorrow's CPI data is the week's big report, several AI infrastructure firms share results later and eyes are on oil and Iran. There's little progress toward a resolution. Important Disclosures This material is intended for general informational and educational purposes only. This should not be considered an individualized recommendation or personalized investment advice. The securities, investment products and investment strategies mentioned are not suitable for everyone. Each investor needs to review an investment strategy for their own particular situation before making any investment or trading decisions. All expressions of opinion are subject to change without notice in reaction to shifting market conditions. Data contained herein from third party providers is obtained from what are considered reliable sources. However, its accuracy, completeness or reliability cannot be guaranteed. For illustrative purposes only. Individual situations will vary. Not intended to be reflective of results you can expect to achieve. Investing involves risk, including, for some products, more than your initial investment. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Supporting documentation for any claims or statistical information is available upon request. Diversification and rebalancing strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Indexes are unmanaged, do not incur management fees, costs, and expenses and cannot be invested in directly. For more information on indexes, please see schwab.com/indexdefinitions. The policy analysis provided by the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., does not constitute and should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any political party. Fixed income securities are subject to increased loss of principal during periods of rising interest rates. Fixed-income investments are subject to various other risks including changes in credit quality, market valuations, liquidity, prepayments, early redemption, corporate events, tax ramifications, and other factors. Digital currencies [such as bitcoin] are highly volatile and not backed by any central bank or government. Digital currencies lack many of the regulations and consumer protections that legal-tender currencies and regulated securities have. Due to the high level of risk, investors should view digital currencies as a purely speculative instrument. Cryptocurrency-related products carry a substantial level of risk and are not suitable for all investors. Investments in cryptocurrencies are relatively new, highly speculative, and may be subject to extreme price volatility, illiquidity, and increased risk of loss, including your entire investment in the fund. Spot markets on which cryptocurrencies trade are relatively new and largely unregulated, and therefore, may be more exposed to fraud and security breaches than established, regulated exchanges for other financial assets or instruments. Some cryptocurrency-related products use futures contracts to attempt to duplicate the performance of an investment in cryptocurrency, which may result in unpredictable pricing, higher transaction costs, and performance that fails to track the price of the reference cryptocurrency as intended. Please read more about risks of trading cryptocurrency futures here. Schwab does not recommend the use of technical analysis as a sole means of investment research. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. Apple Podcasts and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Google Podcasts and the Google Podcasts logo are trademarks of Google LLC. Spotify and the Spotify logo are registered trademarks of Spotify AB. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.
Learn more about Astraeus Wealth Management: http://astraeuswealth.com/partner-with-us Guy Adami speaks with Jim Swartwout, CEO of Prosperum Fintech Holdings about Swartwout's four-decade career across Schwab, Fidelity, E-Trade, TradeMonster, Scottrade, Robinhood, and more, and what it reveals about the evolution of retail investing. Swartwout argues retail is in a “golden age” driven by better data, tools, fractional trading, extended-hours markets, and lower costs, and says payment for order flow is not a meaningful issue at current levels. They discuss social-media-driven concentration and communities, Prosperum/Avantgarde's education and partner communities, and AI features aiming to deliver “full service broker” support via bots. They cover options becoming more mainstream with education, market strength amid uncertainty, valuation risk, low VIX versus single-stock volatility, hedging demand, competition among brokers, access to private markets for accredited investors, interest in prediction markets, and potential election-related volatility. After the break, Dan Nathan hosts Jay Jacobs, BlackRock's US head of equity ETFs, to discuss the growth of ETFs and new product tools for investors. Jacobs explains the launch of IQQQ, an iShares NASDAQ-100 ETF designed for long-term compounding with a low fee (12 bps, waived to 10 bps through July 31, 2027) and a lower share price to improve accessibility for smaller investors and options traders. They address Nasdaq-100 concentration and BlackRock's related products QTop (top 30 names) and QNext (next 70) to help investors manage concentration. Jacobs contrasts iShares' diversified semiconductor ETF SOXX, which caps top holdings around 7–8%, with more concentrated alternatives, and frames semiconductors as foundational to AI-driven growth. He outlines ETFs' role in expanding market access, discusses tokenization's potential for 24/7 global trading and operational efficiency while emphasizing market structure and liquidity needs, and notes BlackRock has not launched daily inverse or leveraged ETFs. The conversation closes with AI as a major economic force and BlackRock's active AI ETF BAI, which seeks diversified exposure across the full AI value chain. —FOLLOW USYouTube: @RiskReversalMediaInstagram: @riskreversalmediaTwitter: @RiskReversalLinkedIn: RiskReversal Media The financial opinions expressed in Risk Reversal content are for information purposes only. The opinions expressed by the hosts and participants are not an attempt to influence specific trading behavior, investments, or strategies. Past performance does not necessarily predict future outcomes. No specific results or profits are assured when relying on Risk Reversal. Before making any investment or trade, evaluate its suitability for your circumstances and consider consulting your own financial or investment advisor. The financial products discussed in Risk Reversal carry a high level of risk and may not be appropriate for many investors. If you have uncertainties, it's advisable to seek professional advice. Remember that trading involves a risk to your capital, so only invest money that you can afford to lose. Derivatives are not suitable for all investors and involve the risk of losing more than the amount originally deposited and any profit you might have made. This communication is not a recommendation or offer to buy, sell or retain any specific investment or service.
Jim and Chris discuss listener emails on Social Security spousal benefits, a listener PSA on HSA tax strategies and treasuries, and inherited IRA RMD rules for minor beneficiaries. (9:00) A listener asks about qualifying for spousal benefits after a lengthy separation, since both spouses are now retired but remain legally married. (28:15) The guys share a listener PSA on tax strategies involving harvesting HSA-eligible expenses, including Medicare B and D premiums, as a tax-free funding source, and on laddering treasury bills through Fidelity or Schwab instead of TreasuryDirect. (40:15) George follows up on inherited IRA rules for minor child beneficiaries, asking whether an eligible designated beneficiary can elect the 10-year rule instead of taking the stretch, which requires RMDs. The post Spousal Benefits, HSA Tax Strategies PSA, Inherited IRAs: Q&A #2632 appeared first on The Retirement and IRA Show.
Financial stress doesn't just live in your bank account, it lives in your body. In this episode, I sat down with Kiana Danial, founder of Invest Diva and creator of the Triple Compounding method to unpack why money is just as much a wellbeing issue as sleep, movement, or nutrition, and why investing confidently starts with understanding your own risk tolerance, not chasing hype.This episode gives you a system for thinking about risk, debt, and growth instead of a list of stock tips.What we explore:- Risk tolerance: separating personality from actual financial capacity- Candlestick psychology: reading market emotion instead of chasing headlines- Triple compounding: building wealth across self, business, and investments- Kids and money: Roth IRA, UTMA, 529 accounts, and hiring your own children- Portfolio borrowing: using leverage instead of selling and paying taxesChapters:00:00 Why Personal Finance Is a Wellbeing Issue01:32 From Iran to an Eight-Figure Portfolio07:07 The 3 Factors That Shape Risk Tolerance10:46 Reading Stock Candles Instead of Headlines13:21 How $50 a Month Builds Wealth16:56 Roth IRA vs UTMA vs 529 for Kids21:54 How to Borrow Against Your Portfolio Tax-Free25:24 The Habit That Separates Wealth Builders From Everyone Else32:09 Money Myths Keeping You From Investing41:14 Robinhood vs Schwab vs Fidelity Compared49:03 Overlooked Sectors: Energy, Defense, and Boring Giants58:32 How She Prioritizes Sleep Despite a Busy ScheduleAbout Kiana Danial:Kiana Danial is the founder and CEO of Invest Diva and the creator of Triple Compounding, a wealth-building framework that took her from $500 to an eight-figure portfolio. A former engineer and best-selling author of nine books, she's known for translating investing into plain, usable language without the hype.Connect with Kiana DanialWebsite: https://www.triplecompounding.com/yesInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/investdiva/This episode is sponsored by:TRUE NUTRITION: