Podcasts about Schwab

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

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.

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 ===

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

In Episode 49 of High Stakes, Tracey Devlyn sits down with author Kathleen Schwab to discuss her debut novel, QUEENSWOOD—a lush, lyrical historical fantasy debut set in twelfth-century Ireland, where a nobleman's daughter and the Crown Prince of Faerie must navigate duty, forbidden love, and the fate of an enchanted forest. “A beautifully written fantasy debut! Lyrical, enchanting, adventurous—a book that you will remember long after you turn the last page.” —Stacey Marie Brown, USA Today bestselling author Author's Website: https://authorkathleenschwab.squarespace.com Show Notes: https://traceydevlyn.com/podcast Love this episode? Rate it ⭐️ Thumbs Up

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.

The old week ended with a new record for the S&P 500, helped by falling yields as rate hike odds dropped on a weak jobs report. Yields and oil, along with Iran, remain watchwords. 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.

It's my birthday and I've got Covid - BTW - my dad is okay - overnight in the hospital as a precaution. But I am still ill - but my portfolio is still KICKING BUTT! FORMULA - ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Alpha Picks + Seeking Alpha Premium ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠+ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Trendspider and Sidekick⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - PERFECT TOGETHER! THESE SALES END SOON: I negotiated to get 59% off and 100 Sidekick messages per month for the entire year. Plus you get my 4 hour algorithm and so many other benefits with ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠JUST THIS LINK ONLY ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILY STOCK PICK SPECIAL OFFER - ONLY ANNUAL PLANS AVAILABLE ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Seeking Alpha's SUMMER SALE ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠✅ *BEST DEAL - SEEKING ALPHA BUNDLE - Save over $150 and get Premium and Alpha Picks together ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠- ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠✅ ALPHA PICKS - Want to Beat the S&P? Save $50⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠✅ Seeking Alpha Premium ONLY - FREE 7 DAY TRIAL ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠✅SEEKING ALPHA PRO - YOUR FIRST MONTH ONLY $89 ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠✅ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠NEW - QUANT GROWTH AND INCOME PORTFOLIO - SAVE $50⁠⁠⁠EPISODE SUMMARY

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.

With Liz Ann Sonders away, Collin Martin is joined by Schwab Head of Macro Research and Strategy Kevin Gordon for an in-depth conversation on the economy, Federal Reserve policy, bond yields, equities, and global markets. The episode opens with the idea that "good news can be bad news" for markets. Kevin explains that strong economic data, particularly in the labor market, can sometimes hurt stocks because it increases the likelihood of tighter monetary policy. The conversation then turns to interest rates and the surprising resilience of markets despite elevated bond yields. Collin and Kevin discuss the Fed's increasingly hawkish tone, the unusual presence of multiple dissents favoring rate hikes, and concerns about communication from Chair Kevin Warsh.  Looking ahead, Collin and Kevin identify inflation data, labor-market reports, Fed commentary, retail sales, and inflation-expectation surveys as the key indicators investors should monitor in the weeks ahead. 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. 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 A hyperscaler is a large-scale cloud service provider that offers vast computing, storage, and networking resources through a distributed infrastructure of interconnected servers and software. (0826-TEWK) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Stocks eased from record highs Thursday but remain sharply up for the week approaching today's July payrolls report. Jobs growth of 86,000 is expected, with unemployment steady. 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.

With the July payrolls report due tomorrow, investors eye weekly jobless claims, watch for Middle East developments, and mull memory chip results after the rally slowed. 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 does real faith look like? In this message, Josiah Schwab explores the relationship between Jonathan and David to reveal a powerful truth: faith begins with surrender, and surrender begins discipleship. Jonathan was the rightful heir to Israel's throne, yet he willingly laid down his robe, armor, and future before God's anointed king. His story challenges us to ask a difficult question: What am I still holding onto that belongs to Jesus? Whether you're wrestling with salvation for the first time or learning what it means to follow Christ more deeply, this message reminds us that discipleship isn't a one-time decision—it's a daily surrender. Key Scriptures: 1 Samuel 18:1–4 1 Samuel 20:30–33 Matthew 10:37 John 3:30 Faith begins in surrender, and surrender begins discipleship.   From Sunday 07.19.26

There's an entire television network dedicated to doing things yourself — home renovation, landscaping, interior design, all of it. And the DIY mentality is genuinely admirable. But when it comes to retirement planning, the stakes of a bad install are a little higher than a crooked backsplash. Let's talk about what DIY planning actually looks like in practice.   Important Links: Website: http://www.yourplanningpros.com Call: 844-707-7381   ----more---- TRANSCRIPT:    Speaker 1: We've created an entire television network dedicated to doing things yourself. Everywhere you turn, it's DIY, this and that, home renovation, landscaping, interior design, all of it. And the DIY mentality is genuinely admirable. But when it comes to retirement planning, the stakes of a bad install are a little higher than just a messed up backsplash in your kitchen. So let's talk about that this week, the DIY movement in retirement planning and what that looks like actually in practice.   Hey everybody, welcome into the podcast. This is Plan With The Tax Man with Tony Mauro. And we're going DIY this week, Tony, little pitfalls of doing things yourself. Everybody does it to a certain degree in many walks of life. You and I both have done a lot of DIY things ourselves, but certainly when it comes to the financials, this is maybe room to pause and think about this.   Technology, Tony, has changed. It's super easy to do a lot more things. Absolutely. I'll agree with that. I'm sure you will too. But the complication of preservation and distribution, AKA retirement, is vastly different than accumulation. So let's talk about that this week a little bit.   How are you doing, my friend?   Tony Mauro: I'm doing good. [inaudible 00:01:36].   Speaker 1: Do you agree with my statement there?   Tony Mauro: I agree with your statement. Yeah. And I love this topic for a lot of reasons because I think as we... Well, in the world we live in, especially with the AI advancements and whatnot, it's just getting worse and worse. Everybody wants to do everything themselves. And I think a lot of times, and I'm one of them too-   Speaker 1: Sure.   Tony Mauro: ... I used to love doing home renovations because I enjoyed it. But now that I'm a little older and I try to preach this to my son and whoever will listen, is you need to outsource everything that you're not good at or you don't enjoy because that's going to free you up to do what you do enjoy and/or make money. And we do it at our business here. I mean, I don't touch the IT. I don't touch the phones. Now, could I, and try all that? Yeah, sure.   Speaker 1: Sure.   Tony Mauro: It clutters up my life too much. And I want to give it to the guys that are good at it. And so yeah, I agree with your statement wholeheartedly.   Speaker 1: And it's one of those things where we certainly know in this world it's been more and more difficult, especially post-COVID, to get people to show up and maybe do quality jobs in different aspects of things.   Tony Mauro: Sure. Yeah.   Speaker 1: And so everybody feels like, "I'm just going to take on this." What's the old saying? If you want it done, right, do it yourself?   Tony Mauro: Right. Do it yourself.   Speaker 1: And that could be true. But I mean, my brother and I are fairly handy and we built some things around my property, Tony, but when it came time for a complete overhaul of the back deck and building a roof on it and all this kind of other stuff, I just did not feel comfortable in our skillset, so I farmed it out. Did it cost me more? Yeah, probably. But then again, maybe not because how many times might I had to double back and fix something that I didn't do right the first time because I don't have the skillset or the longevity of doing these things.   So financially speaking, I think that same thing happens. There's so many tools out there now. And growing the money... I mean, Tony, check this out. So you might know this off the top of your head, but if you don't, don't look it up. Just give me a quick educated guess. At the time we're recording right now, how much do you think the S&P 500 is up the last five years?   Tony Mauro: Cumulative?   Speaker 1: Yeah. Cumulative. Give me an idea. What do you think? Five years.   Tony Mauro: Five years, I'm going to say 45%.   Speaker 1: Okay. How blown away are you that it's 75?   Tony Mauro: That doesn't blow me away.   Speaker 1: Okay.   Tony Mauro: I was thinking a little higher, but no, it doesn't blow me away.   Speaker 1: Okay. 75. Crazy, right?   Tony Mauro: Yeah.   Speaker 1: Five years cumulatively, the S&P 500 is up 75%. The Dow up 50 over that same period. So it's easy for people to go, "Oh man, you can be an idiot and throw a dart at something and do well." But when it comes time for the... As we get closer to financial or retirement, excuse me, distribution, there's a lot more at stake. And I think this is where people start to find themselves at a crossroads. And do you find that? Do you have people coming in that are like, "I've been doing it myself, Tony, but there's a lot I don't know and I'm getting a little nervous. I want to make sure I don't screw this up because this is my forever money"?   Tony Mauro: They do. And that's how a lot of people come to us. And if they've been doing things themselves, we certainly don't tear apart what they're doing, but we just try to ask a lot of questions and make sure that not only... Because a lot of people come in, "Well, I've been doing this myself and I've been averaging 10% a year or I've been beating the S&P 500."   Speaker 1: Sure.   Tony Mauro: And I say, "Well, okay. We really have you... Let's see, but that's good." And then the first question as I ask is, "What do you have for an emergency fund?" And they have a strange look on their face. And we start talking about that. I said, "Well, what about you... Tell me about your assets and things. And then we'll get to the part of, well, what do you have for life insurance?" And so some of that stuff they don't think about. All they're thinking about, "I throw my dart at the board. I'm investing in this. It's growing. I should be okay." And that may be the case, but there's more to a comprehensive, keyword, financial plan.   Speaker 1: And you may be doing well, right. So think about my analogy a second ago about what the numbers have done. So let's say you had a million bucks [inaudible 00:05:37] on the S&P 500, you're up half a million dollars over five years. And you're thinking, "Man, I got this thing figured out." Great. Okay. So now you got a 1.5 million sitting in this account, you're getting close to retirement and you got to start pulling this money out. And now you don't realize the things that you're triggering. So your income strategy is going to affect some other things. It's going to affect your Medicaid or your Medicare, excuse me. So you're going to get those issues. You got to start dealing with the IRMAA situation. That catches people off guard. The taxation of the whole thing, Tony, is what catches a lot of people off guard. That's where a lot of people are going, "Okay, this is why I definitely need help. How can I be more efficient here?" And with you being a CPA and a CFP, you're thinking about the tax situation, but as well as the future planning.   Tony Mauro: That's right. And some of those triggers you're talking about are exactly what I think a lot of people miss really with a good advisor. With us, we're looking always at, we know you want to get the most money, especially around retirement.   Speaker 1: Sure.   Tony Mauro: We got to do it tax efficiently because we don't want to give the feds any more than you have to. So let's think about it. And let's take everything into account, Social Security and everything else you might have coming in, to make sure that that's the case, that we're always on track with that. And don't miss that by too much because it's just ineffective. And at the end of the day, you bleed money and you don't even know it.   Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, I can see somebody coming in DIY or they've done well. Let's just go with a million bucks, Tony, because it's easy. They've got a million dollars in their portfolio. And they come in and they're like, "Hey, I heard Ramsey talking about taking 8%. I've done the math. I'm going to pull 80 grand out a year, blah, blah, blah. I should be good to go, right?" You know what I mean? And it's like, that's a quick back of the napkin thing. It's like, "Well, all right, the 4% rule is half of that. The guy who created the 4% rules moved it to 4.7."   But for easy math, Tony, you could sit there and go, "Well, does 40,000, if we go with the 4% rule, does it get it done? Does it drive the plan?" Because Ramsey's thing is, "Well, if the market averages 10% year over year at minimum, why not take 8%?" But of course, the downside of that, Tony, is that to make that happen, you're 100% invested in the market. And I think again, as we age, we're not really comfortable taking that amount of risk.   Tony Mauro: No, no. And I think that's one of the flaws that a lot of DIYers end up with is they'll come in with some... We use that example.   Speaker 1: Rule of thumb. Yeah.   Tony Mauro: Just that rule of thumb, yeah. And when we sit down and start putting some numbers to that and their situation, most of the time... And I like Dave Ramsey's stuff about getting out of debt, staying out of debt, saving and whatnot. I don't agree with the 8% year-over-year. I think that's too aggressive based on things that happen not only in the market, because he's assuming it earns 10% every year. We know it does not, even though lately it's been way up. But what if you go through a stint right when you retire that it goes up 10% one year? And then we have a situation like from '04 through '08 where the market did nothing and go down. Each year you're drawing that same amount out on a lesser principle. You start going downhill very quickly. I think something like that is unsustainable long term. And you don't want to get into that doing it yourself and then be 75, 80 and out of money and scratching your head saying, "Man, where did I go wrong? This was supposed to work."   I think that's where a planner can lend some value. I'm not saying that...   Speaker 1: Do you-   Tony Mauro: Go ahead.   Speaker 1: I was just going to... No, finish your thought, please.   Tony Mauro: I was just going to say, I'm not saying you may not do that, but I think you should do some sort of hybrid of that. If you want a little more money out, maybe not take it out maybe in the good years. In the bad years, no. It should be 4, 4.5.   Speaker 1: Well, that's a great point, right? So you can do the back of the napkin thing and say, "Okay, yeah, 4% might make it work." But you're going to have some lean years, you're going to have some better years, right? So it's got to be able to continue to shift and change. And that's what a good strategy and working with a financial professional does because you guys are going to do these reviews, you're going to make tweaks along the way. And sometimes people I think get hung up in the fact too, Tony, that they see these rules of thumb or whatever, like the rule of a hundred or something. They'll look that up, they'll read that and they'll go, "Oh, okay. So it says take my age and that should be safe. So I'm 60, so 60% of my portfolio should be in safe, 40% at risk."   Okay. Yeah, that's a great place to maybe start. But when you guys start diving in and really dissecting the individual or the couple, oftentimes you find that that's not good for both people. And that's another piece of this too. The DIY thing, are you taking into account both people? And does the second person share your DIY enjoyment? Because what happens when you die if you're the person doing it all and they don't want to do it and they don't know anything about it? And now you've left them behind the eight ball too. So that's something-   Tony Mauro: You've left them a mess.   Speaker 1: Yeah.   Tony Mauro: We encounter that a lot because the DIYers, and I think that's one of the mistakes that they make, is the DIYer really loves to do it, for example. And the spouse does not.   Speaker 1: Sure. Yeah. Nothing wrong with that, right?   Tony Mauro: Nope. And then what happens is when the DIYer goes and they haven't talked about it, the spouse, you've left them with a complete disarray mess and they have no idea where to turn to. And they're trying to deal with all of this. We just talked about it on the last episode about leaving people with a mess, is you don't want to do that. So I think that's one of the mistakes that people make there for sure.   I think another one really is that they tend to get so fixated, especially when things are going good, to chasing the highest return. They always find it funny when I say, "Look, return is important, but it's not the only driver." And they look at me kind of funny like, "Well, you're a planner. You're supposed to be... I'm paying you to get me the best return."   Speaker 1: "I want all the money, man. I want all the money. I want to stick it in my ears and go blah, blah, blah." Yeah. But that's a great point, Tony, because okay, let's say you're chasing this aggressive return because the market has been on a tear and you want this higher return. And you go through, you have the planning process with someone like yourself, Tony, and you find out that 5 or 6% return gets it done. Drives your plan, gives you more than you need because maybe you got a pension. Maybe there's two pensions in your family plus Social Security.   So you find out you really only need to be... Your risk level could be much lower and still really drive your plan effectively. But you're taking way too much risk because you want to max it out. And then what happens? Inevitably, Murphy's going to strike. We're going to have a prolonged downturn because we haven't had one really in about 17 years. So we're way overdue for a prolonged. Not a little downturn for three months here, four months there, but like a prolonged downturn. And now you're really kind of screwed. That's the concern.   Tony Mauro: That's the big concern, is right there because it's easy when things are going good and they have been for a long time. Where I think the financial planner really shows their value... I mean, I think we should try to show value all the time, but it's when things aren't going good, you can point to, we're fine. We're still earning a good rate. And if we are down a little bit, we're not down as much as the market. And you're still on track to win your game. Don't focus on the day-to-day returns. Just, "Here's our plan. If we know we can get there and maybe even a little more, we're fine."   Speaker 1: Well, the diversification thing I think bites a lot of DIYers in the tush too, right?   Tony Mauro: It does. That's another one.   Speaker 1: Yeah. So using the rule of thumbs that are out there and then the diversification thing. "Well, I know I'm diversified. I know that's important. So I've got a bunch of stocks. I've got my Schwab account and I've got a bunch of stocks and I've got five mutual funds and I bought them from different companies just so that I'm well diversified." And it's like, yeah. And most of the time you guys go through training and do your forensic analysis. And it's like, "Congratulations. You got a whole lot of large cap in these mutual funds."   Tony Mauro: [inaudible 00:13:50].   Speaker 1: And you got also high fees with these mutual funds. So there's just a lot we don't know when we don't do this every day.   Tony Mauro: You don't. You don't. And just like every DIYer, I mean, every time I do a DIY, especially if it involves any type of real artistry, the pro always does it better because they're doing it all the time.   Speaker 1: Right. Right.   Tony Mauro: But I just had a guy come in last week and he was a tax guy and he was just kind of spouting off. He says, "You know what? I've got a couple of mutual funds." And he says, "I've been doing really well." He said, "But I'm very well diversified." Because I asked him, "How's your diversification?"   "Oh, I'm diversified. I got two funds."   And I said," Well, what are they?" And he gave them to me. Well, they're both small cap world funds that hold very aggressive stocks. I mean, they're from different parts of the world. But I said, "You're really not that diversified. First of all, it's foreign, which has a place in everybody's portfolio, but you have no large cap. You have no conservative. You have no nothing." I said," Do you have a financial plan?"   "No, I just have these funds."   I said, "Well..."   Speaker 1: That's interesting, right? Because a lot of times we do see my analogy, which was a lot of times we see people come in and they've got a bunch of large cap because it's just-   Tony Mauro: Large cap.   Speaker 1: Yeah. They've got small caps.   Tony Mauro: That's [inaudible 00:14:59] here.   Speaker 1: Microsoft and Coke and so on and so forth. And you have four or five of those and they all have about 70% of the same exact thing in them.   Tony Mauro: Same exact thing. Yeah.   Speaker 1:  And if it's all tech-heavy, well, what happens when tech takes a beating? Which obviously everything right now is tech heavy. So yeah, it's just, you're not as diversified as you think you are. And it's not just the portfolio, Tony, you started this earlier as well, and we'll finish with this. Part of the DIY thing that most of us just are terrified of and don't want to mess with, and this is I think probably what brings a lot of people to the door, is diversification of the portfolio and the income stream is one thing. Tax diversification is another, because that's an animal that... We're all terrified of the IRS.   Tony Mauro: Yeah. I mean, at the end of the day, that is the truth. And I'm a big believer. I'm not anti-government, but I don't want to give them any more than we have to legally. So if we've got the opportunity within the rules that they set, let's make sure we're not doing that.   Speaker 1: And tax diversification is a thing. Don't have it all just in the 401(k). So we've talked about this about a million times, right? So you need different kinds of tax buckets.   Tony Mauro: You do. You need a lot of different tax buckets. And to make sure you're pulling money out, especially in retirement, as efficiently as possible, meaning trying to minimize your taxes. We've had people come in and they're just pulling money out of pre-tax money out of 401(k)s just because they didn't know any better when they have all this after tax cash sitting over here. Let's draw on that first and let's keep this other stuff growing. So it's just little things like that I think advisors lend a lot of value in this area.   Speaker 1: Any final thoughts for the DIYers out there? Things that you've seen in your firm, people come in that maybe is the biggest kind of pain point for driving them in to see you or have we kind of covered them?   Tony Mauro: Well, I think we've kind of covered, most of them, the pain points. I would just tell anybody out there that is starting to get nervous, if you've been doing things yourself and you're starting to feel whatever, anything, get with a planner. If anything else, and you're worried about, "Oh, well, I don't want to do it because I'm not going to use a planner," well, go in and have them charge you just a one-time fee. Have them take a look at what you've got and give you some advice. It might be worth whatever they're going to charge you to do that. And at least then you've got at least some objective opinions about what you're doing.   And who knows, maybe you want to say it, you're getting to the point where it's like, "You know what? I'm done doing this myself. I want to be involved, but I want a planner. I want somebody to help me, especially in the distribution phase to make sure that things are going good." That would be my advice.   Speaker 1: All right. Well, good stuff today here on the podcast. Look, there's nothing wrong with doing the DIY thing. It has its place in all walks of life and even financially. But some projects are a little worth calling a professional for, especially when the mistakes can really throw you into a real tizzy for the next 30 years.   So if you've been handling your retirement on your own, a second set of eyes, a second opinion is certainly important. Tony and his team are here for just that. You may find that you've been doing a bang up awesome job, but you also may get educated, as Tony said, on some things you just didn't know about or see coming. And so it's worthwhile to have that conversation with yourself. Again, Tony's a CPA and a CFP, an EA of 30 plus years in the industry. So a great resource for you to tap into, not only in Iowa, but he's got clients all over the country as well. He's licensed to work in different states.   So if you need some help, you're checking out the podcast, reach out to him, yourplanningpros.com. That's yourplanningpros.com for some time onto the calendar. Check out the tools and resources there. Subscribe to the podcast. Plan With The Tax Man on Apple or Spotify or whatever app you enjoy using, but certainly get yourself some professional help and advice.   Tony, thanks for breaking it down, my friend, as always.   Tony Mauro: All right. We'll talk to you on the next show.   Speaker 1: We'll see you next time. Have yourself a great week. And thank you for some time here on Plan With The Tax Man with Tony Mauro from Tax Doctor, Inc.   Securities offered through Avantax Investment Services SM, member FINRA, SIPC. Investment advisory services offered through Avantax Advisory Services. Insurance services offered through an Avantax affiliated insurance agency. Investment strategies discussed in this episode may not be suitable for all investors. Please consult with a financial professional.  

Yesterday's rally to record highs reflected hopes for peace and strong earnings. However, SpaceX and Advanced Micro Devices appeared to disappoint with results after the close. 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.

After stocks closed near record highs Monday and Palantir topped estimates, investors await AMD and SpaceX after the close. Job openings kick off a key labor data 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.

Episode 156: This week, Kyle Van Pelt talks with Ian Wenik, Editor at Citywire. Ian covers the independent wealth management industry with a focus on RIAs, mergers and acquisitions, advisor technology, and the business forces reshaping financial advice. Through his reporting and conversations with industry leaders, he has developed a front-row view of the trends driving growth across the advisory landscape. Kyle and Ian explore what separates today's fastest-growing RIAs from the rest of the industry. They discuss why competition for acquisitions continues to intensify, how firms can balance scale with independence, and why organic growth remains the ultimate differentiator. They also examine Schwab's latest referral changes, AI's potential to level the playing field for mid-sized firms, emerging technology trends, and what Ian believes the future holds for advisors building the next generation of great firms. In this episode: (00:00) - Intro (03:25) - A preview of Citywire's fastest-growing RIAs report  (05:47) - Why the M&A market is becoming more competitive  (08:00) - Why large RIAs struggle to reach the public markets (11:02) - Are RIAs becoming the new wirehouses?  (13:21) - Deal structures that don't work (16:05) - Schwab's referral changes and what they mean for RIAs  (22:06) - What's driving organic growth today (25:21) - How AI can help mid-sized firms compete  (27:00) - Ian's advice for firms that want to stay independent (27:58) - Technology trends among the fastest-growing firms (29:16) - Ian's outlook on the future of the financial services industry (30:41) - Ian's Milemarker Minute Key Takeaways Deep expertise creates opportunities. Whether investing, acquiring businesses, or serving clients, deep subject-matter expertise allows firms to spot hidden value and underrated talent before the broader market takes notice.  Ownership drives commitment. If you want entrepreneurial people to stay engaged, give them meaningful opportunities to build equity rather than relying solely on compensation. Optimize organic growth strategies for modern discovery. Traditional search and referral channels are evolving. To maintain a strong pipeline, leaders must diversify their acquisition strategies—leveraging digital media, strategic partnerships, and AI-driven search visibility. Use AI to create more time for people, not less. Automating operational work improves efficiency, but relationships and trust remain the foundation of exceptional client service. Let AI handle the back office so you can spend more time on the conversations that actually grow the business. Quotes "For the public markets to open up to RIAs, you need a really strong, well-capitalized firm, a strong balance sheet, a clean operating and capital structure, strong cash flows, and high organic growth." ~ Ian Wenik "The reason that we've seen so many transactions fail is that the transactions are structured in a way where it's cash-heavy, short earn-out. It allows the founders to cash themselves out. They peace out after maybe a year, and you have a second generation that's actually managing the underlying client book of business that has no incentive to stick around." ~  Ian Wenik "Invest in what you do best. Remember why you got into this business. If you focus on that core business, as long as you maintain a baseline level of profitability, a lot of things will fall into place." ~ Ian Wenik Links  Ian Wenik on LinkedIn Citywire Edelman Financial Engines Focus Financial Partners Creative Planning Cerity Partners LPL Financial  Morgan Stanley  Future Proof Joshua Brown Goldman Sachs  Moneta Group Carson Group  Peter Mallouk Charles Schwab  Orion Advisor Solutions  Movement Connect with our hosts Milemarker.co Kyle on LinkedIn Jud on LinkedIn Subscribe and stay in touch Apple Podcasts Spotify YouTube Produce game-changing content with Turncast Turncast helps your company grow by producing top-quality content and fostering transformative conversations. We specialize in content generation, podcasting, digital strategy, and audience growth for fintech and financial services companies. Learn more at Turncast.com.

Schwab, Sylvia www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Lesart

Palantir kicks off another packed earnings slate after the bell, while manufacturing data is in focus this morning. Attention will then shift to jobs data later in the 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 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. (0131-0826) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Individual retirement accounts (IRAs) are one of the most widely used retirement savings vehicles, yet many investors are unsure how they work. Mark Riepe breaks down IRA basics, including traditional IRAs, Roth IRAs, contribution limits, tax advantages, withdrawal rules, and eligibility requirements. He also explains key differences between IRA types and offers a framework for evaluating which option may fit your retirement-planning goals. Whether you're opening your first IRA or comparing retirement account options, this episode provides a practical guide to understanding the fundamentals. After you listen: Read the article "What Is an IRA? Traditional, Roth, and Other Types of IRAs." Learn more about IRAs and what to consider for your retirement planning. 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. Roth IRA conversions require a 5-year holding period before earnings can be withdrawn tax free and subsequent conversions will require their own 5-year holding period. In addition, earnings distributions prior to age 59 1/2 are subject to an early withdrawal penalty. Withdrawals and distributions of taxable amounts are subject to ordinary income tax and, if made prior to age 59½, may be subject to an additional 10% federal income tax penalty, sometimes referred to as an additional income tax.  You generally have to start taking required minimum distributions (RMDs) no later than April 1st of the year following the calendar year you reach age 73 or retire, whichever is later. If you were born on or before June 30, 1949, the required minimum distribution age is 70½. If you were born after June 30, 1949 and before January 1, 1951, the required minimum distribution age is 72. If you own 5% or more of the business sponsoring the Plan, other provisions may apply. Refer to your Plan document for details. However, you are not required to take a minimum distribution from your Roth accounts during your lifetime. A rollover of retirement plan assets to an IRA is not your only option. Carefully consider all of your available options, which may include but not be limited to keeping your assets in your former employer's plan; rolling over assets to a new employer's plan; or taking a cash distribution (taxes and possible withdrawal penalties may apply). Prior to a decision, be sure to understand the benefits and limitations of your available options and consider factors such as differences in investment-related expenses, plan or account fees, available investment options, distribution options, legal and creditor protections, the availability of loan provisions, tax treatment, and other concerns specific to your individual circumstances. Investing involves risk, including loss of principal. ​Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The Schwab Center for Financial Research is a division of Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. 0826-RTYC Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In this episode of The Wrap with Chris Whalen, Chris joins Julia La Roche to argue that Kevin Warsh has a credibility problem: he's holding rates, avoiding confrontation with a divided board, and saying almost nothing, while the bond market does the tightening for him with the ten-year near 4.7% and mortgages headed toward seven-plus. Whalen's prescription is blunt — take back last year's cuts with two quarter-point hikes, consider a surprise August move, raise margin requirements, and keep shrinking the balance sheet, because Treasury is the dog and the Fed is barely the tail. From there the conversation ranges across a coming diesel and fertilizer shortage nobody in Washington will discuss, gold's role as real money in Asia versus a paper price in the West, and Whalen's own portfolio, from Annaly and Rhythm Capital to Flagstar and roughly a fifth in precious metals. The back half turns spicy with Tom Gober's new guest post on life insurers: private-credit-controlled annuity writers reinsuring liabilities offshore without posting enough assets behind them, hidden by state secrecy laws and rubber-stamped by ratings agencies that were never working for you. Plus PennyMac's bad quarter, George Gleason's construction-lending model at Bank OZK, and mailbag questions on SpaceX and mining stocks.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    Thomas Gober guest article: https://www.theinstitutionalriskanalyst.com/post/theira874Seeing 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 — Intro: no, the show isn't being cancelled1:52 — Warsh's first pressers: three dissenters and a chairman who says nothing5:42 — How Warsh gets credibility: take back last year's cuts7:20 — Trump stays quiet on Warsh — plus a coming diesel and fertilizer squeeze8:46 — Is the economy finally slowing? The fading power of deficits10:22 — "Treasury is the dog, the Fed is the tail"11:30 — The case for a surprise August hike and less forward guidance12:56 — Gold, Keith Weiner, and the permanent backwardation thesis15:38 — Gold as bank capital: pledging metal as repo collateral16:37 — Whalen's book: Annaly, Rhythm, miners, energy, Schwab, Flagstar19:41 — PennyMac's ugly quarter and why it drags the whole mortgage group down21:23 — Bank OZK vs. the big banks on commercial real estate23:19 — Tom Gober's guest post: is your life insurer actually solvent?27:00 — Offshore reinsurance, secrecy states, and why ratings won't save you29:36 — Mailbag: SpaceX below IPO price — buy more or bail?31:53 — Mailbag: miners vs. metal, GLD/GDX vs. SLV/SIL35:13 — What's next: mortgage earnings, the bank 50, and the gold book

We're back from summer break just in time to help you prepare for the new school year. Check out what we talked about: The series “Crave" by Tracy Wolff with readalike series "Zodiac Academy" by Caroline Peckham. The "Atlas" trilogy by Olivie Blake with readalike "Vicious" by V.E. Schwab. "Girl in Ice" by Erica Ferencik with readalike "The Archivist" by Martha Cooley. The series "Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children" by Random Riggs with a graphic novel duology and a film adaption of the same name. "What You Wish For" by Katherine Center with readalike "Teach Me" by Olivia Dade. "Cat Among the Pigeons" by Agatha Christie. To access complete transcripts for all episodes of Not Your Mother's Library, please visit: oakcreeklibrary.org/podcast Check out books, movies, and other materials through the Milwaukee County Federated Library System: countycat.mcfls.org wplc.overdrive.com oakcreeklibrary.org

Investors still digesting mixed GDP and inflation data will watch consumer sentiment and earnings from oil majors today amid a rotation back into chip and AI-linked stocks. 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. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

With Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services, Diamond Consultants Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak unpack today's IBD vs. RIA landscape, explaining what has changed, where each model excels, and how to determine which path best supports the business you want to build. In Summary The independent wealth management landscape has changed dramatically, making the decision between an independent broker dealer (IBD) and an RIA more nuanced than ever before. Louis Diamond welcomes Diamond Consultants' Vice President of Independent Advisor Services, Josh Tomolak, for a practical discussion of how the independent space has evolved, what truly differentiates the IBD and RIA models today, and how advisors can evaluate which path best aligns with the business they want to build. The Storyline Not long ago, the decision to become independent was relatively straightforward. Advisors either remained with a traditional firm or pursued independence through one of a limited number of models. Today, the conversation is far more complex. Independent broker dealers have significantly expanded their capabilities, offering stronger technology, larger transition packages, greater flexibility, and even pathways to RIA ownership. At the same time, the RIA ecosystem has matured into a sophisticated marketplace supported by multiple custodians, outsourced service providers, institutional capital, and enterprise platforms that rival many of the industry's largest firms. As these developments have unfolded, the traditional distinctions between an IBD and an RIA have become less obvious. Advisors evaluating their options are no longer simply asking whether they should become independent—they're asking which model best supports the clients they serve, the business they envision, and the lifestyle they want to create. In this Industry Update, Louis and Josh unpack the realities behind the IBD vs. RIA decision. They discuss where the two models overlap, where meaningful differences still exist, and why factors like service, technology, economics, operational responsibility, enterprise value, and long-term optionality often matter more than labels alone. Whether you're considering changing independent firms, launching your own RIA, or simply want a better understanding of how the independent landscape has evolved, this conversation provides an objective framework for evaluating today's choices—and preparing for tomorrow's opportunities. Topics Covered Independent Broker Dealer (IBD) vs. RIA models The evolution of supportive independence Technology investments across the independent space Transition support and advisor mobility Capital solutions and recruiting economics Business formation and enterprise value Launching an independent RIA Multi-custodial platforms and open architecture Minority investments and succession planning Future trends shaping advisor independence > Download a transcript of this episode… Listen and Learn Highlights for Advisors Why are already-independent advisors reconsidering their current model? (5:27) Josh explains why service, technology, economics, and growing optionality are causing advisors to reevaluate their existing affiliations. How have independent broker dealers and RIAs become more alike? (19:28) Louis and Josh discuss the growing convergence between the two models and why the distinction is becoming less obvious than many advisors assume. What really separates an IBD from an RIA? (25:04) A practical discussion of autonomy, compliance, flexibility, custody, economics, and advisor experience. What misconceptions keep advisors from launching an RIA? (36:29) Josh outlines the “Four Pillars” of launching an RIA and explains where advisors tend to either overestimate or underestimate the operational realities. Which advisors thrive most in each model? (33:12) The conversation explores why there isn't a universally “better” model—only one that's better aligned with an advisor's goals. What trends are quietly reshaping independence? (42:13) Minority investments, enterprise value, business formation, and changing revenue models may have an even greater impact than advisors realize today. Key Takeaways Independence has evolved from a destination into an ongoing strategic decision. Independent broker dealers have significantly improved technology, transition support, economics, and flexibility. The RIA ecosystem has matured into a highly sophisticated marketplace with broad outsourcing and support options. Choosing between an IBD and an RIA should begin with long-term business objectives—not industry perceptions. Building a valuable business depends more on business structure and scalability than simply growing assets. Advisors considering independence should evaluate models with an open mind rather than relying on outdated assumptions. The next decade will likely bring continued convergence between independent business models. https://youtu.be/jHDVso2TsmQ Quotable Moments “The question is no longer, ‘Do I want to go independent?' The question is, ‘What kind of independence makes the most sense for my clients, business, and goals?'” “Business formation is far more important than assets under management.” “The way you build your business will ultimately determine how valuable that business becomes.” “Everything in an RIA is going to cost you either your time or your money.” FAQs Is there still a meaningful difference between an IBD and an RIA? Yes. While the two models increasingly overlap, they differ in areas such as flexibility, compliance structure, operational responsibility, economics, and control. Why are more independent advisors changing firms today? Improved technology, stronger transition support, evolving economics, and better service models are prompting many advisors to reassess whether their current platform still fits their business. Is launching an RIA easier than it used to be? Yes. Supportive independence, outsourced service providers, and improved custodial resources have significantly reduced many of the historical barriers. Does every entrepreneurial advisor belong in the RIA model? No. The best fit depends on an advisor's appetite for ownership, customization, operational responsibility, and long-term vision. What matters more: assets under management or how the business is built? Josh argues that scalable business formation often has a greater impact on enterprise value than AUM alone. What's the biggest mistake advisors make when evaluating independence? Starting with assumptions instead of objectives. The most effective due diligence begins by defining the business you're trying to build, then identifying the model best suited to support it. Yes. While the two models increasingly overlap, they differ in areas such as flexibility, compliance structure, operational responsibility, economics, and control. Improved technology, stronger transition support, evolving economics, and better service models are prompting many advisors to reassess whether their current platform still fits their business. Yes. Supportive independence, outsourced service providers, and improved custodial resources have significantly reduced many of the historical barriers. No. The best fit depends on an advisor's appetite for ownership, customization, operational responsibility, and long-term vision. Josh argues that scalable business formation often has a greater impact on enterprise value than AUM alone. Starting with assumptions instead of objectives. The most effective due diligence begins by defining the business you're trying to build, then identifying the model best suited to support it. Related Resources IBD vs. RIA Comparison Guide IBD vs. RIA Revisited: Two Independent Pathways for Advisors to Consider 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… IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence A conversation with Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services at Diamond Consultants.      Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence. It’s a conversation with Josh Tomolak, our Vice President of Independent Advisor Services. 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: For a long time, going independent would suggest the destination. Today, it’s often the beginning of a different conversation. As the independent space has matured, advisors have more choices than ever before. Broker-dealers have expanded their capabilities. The RIA ecosystem has become increasingly sophisticated. Capital is more readily available and support models now exist that would’ve been difficult to imagine a decade ago. The result is that many advisors who are already independent are taking a fresh look at whether their current affiliation still aligns with what they’re trying to build. My guest is Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services here at Diamond Consultants and our resident expert on independence. Josh spends his days helping advisors evaluate independence in all its forms from independent broker dealers, the fully independent RIAs and everything in between. And his knowledge is critical because the distinction between these models is often blurred. Many broker dealers now offer pathways to greater autonomy while supported independence has made RIA ownership more accessible than ever before. So the question is no longer simply, “Do I want to go independent?” The question is, “What kind of independence makes the most sense for client, business, and goals?” Josh shares what he’s seeing across the landscape, the misconceptions that continue to shape advisor thinking and the factors that matter most when evaluating the next chapter of an independent business. There’s a lot to discuss, so let’s get to it. Josh, thanks for joining me today. Joshua Tomolak: Thanks for having me, Louis. It’s a real privilege to have come. This is a full circle moment for me going from being a student of your podcast, to working alongside you, to being a guest. So I appreciate you having me. Louis Diamond: Amazing. I’m excited for this one too, because you have a fresh and in the weeds perspective that a lot of our guests simply don’t have. So why don’t you start off, you spend your time helping advisors evaluate independence every day. So working with advisors who are already independent, for the most part. And to me, it feels like the independent space has really evolved dramatically over the last decade. I mean, this podcast is really the epicenter of that to prove that out, but give us a little background on your past roles in the space and then we can get into what you’re seeing right now. Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, I’d be happy to. So I took a very non-traditional path into wealth management. I spent a decade as a deep sea Navy diver, and upon completing my service there, I ended up working for TD Ameritrade. And in my role there, I spent about six years doing nothing but helping financial advisors explore the RIA space, whether that was to join or partner with an RIA, sell to an RIA, or in most cases, launch their own RIA. And one of the things that I ultimately came to terms with is it’s just not the right model for everybody. While I’m a huge advocate for it, we would often lose business to the major broker-dealers of the world. And at the time, I really didn’t understand why. In the last six years at Diamond Consultants has been a very interesting purview into what a lot of the broker-dealers have done and are doing to make themselves more RIA-ish and be very compelling to the right advisor. Louis Diamond: Perfect framing. Your background is incredibly germane to the folks you work with. So let’s start off with the softball here. What are you seeing right now? Joshua Tomolak: It’s not so different than the rest of the industry, the wirehouses, the regional firms, things of that nature, that if you took 10 firms, they’re all likely to go different directions, even if they were identical practices. That could be… A third would go from an independent broker-dealer to another independent broker-dealer. Certainly the supported RIA space is growing every day and has created a lot of very fun and unique solutions for advisors, very customized and curated. And then I think there’s still a lot of really great sophisticated teams and individual contributors that are making the decision to go hyper entrepreneurial and launch their own individual RIA. So the movement’s really all over the board from my perspective. Louis Diamond: It does feel like it’s no longer independence is an alternative option or it’s on the fringes. It’s very front and center whether for breakaways, which is a big topic on our podcast, but in general, the infrastructure has become much, much more sophisticated today than ever before. Advisors have way more tools in their toolbox to serve clients, whether in the private markets or through technology. And it’s no longer that if an advisor’s independent, they’re in the minor leagues where they don’t have the same ability to serve clients like they did if they’re at a big bank or a private bank or a wirehouse. Do you agree? Joshua Tomolak: I absolutely agree. And I’m reminded of a question I got one time from a great team that I worked with in New York. They asked me, “Are there really more options than ever before? Because all we see is one firm selling to another.” And I think that’s a really great point. There’s far less broker dealers on the street than there were even five years ago. But for every Commonwealth, for example, that sells to an LPL, up pops three or four really cool private equity-backed, sophisticated RIA platform firms that are built to service their own unique advisor base. Louis Diamond: I think that’s right. Sitting on the sidelines, sitting on top of everything going on in the industry, I feel like capital is always an interesting topic forever. If an advisor wanted to move within the independent world or break away from a big firm to go independent, the only way to get capital was to go to an independent broker dealer. So we still see that, but I feel like today between all these minority acquisition opportunities, we’re seeing firms acquire practices at time of transition, which is somewhat new. There’s debt solutions, recruiting deals are way up for firms that are paying forgivable loans. RIAs now would, in some cases, will pay a forgivable note. What are you seeing there as far as the availability of capital and just deals in general? Joshua Tomolak: It’s a great question and I didn’t want to take the low-hanging fruit, but capital’s been a huge innovation, I guess, in the last five years I’d say. Just to give you rough quotes, please don’t hold me to it, but traditional transition broker-dealer deals were five years ago, 40 to 60% of Trailing Twelve revenue today are somewhere between 90 and 120%, sometimes north of that for the right team. That’s really meaningful money for the team that is thinking about foregoing a wirehouse deal, for example. I’d also say a lot of these firms are getting hyper-creative in how they solve for capital. The minority investment piece that you mentioned is very interesting. We’re seeing a lot of privatized forgivable notes in the RIA space where third-party or private lenders are basically lending the money and the RIA is making the payments on that forgivable note as long as the advisor is affiliated with them. So there’s been a recognition among the RIA space to get away from the, “Oh, they just took a check” type of mantra, and to say, “Look, I understand there are capital needs. These people are taking a risk. We need to solve for that.” So we’ve seen a lot of that in the marketplace. Louis Diamond: Very interesting. I think another thing financially, and then we’ll keep the train moving, that I know I’ve seen, and maybe you can weigh in if you’ve seen the same, is the cost to an advisor or a business owner to join an independent BD or to join an RIA has come way down, probably in part because of Schwab going to zero on trading. That’s been a catalyst. But it feels like we used to say independent BDs were expensive relative to the RIA world. And in some cases, they certainly could be. And if you’re at scale, maybe you can pick up a point or two being in the RIA world versus a BD. But when you have some of these BDs that have a basis point admin fee or no admin fee at a certain size and the payouts I feel like are similar, maybe have gone up a little bit, but it’s more so like the administrator fees, the platform fees, the program fees. Anyone who’s not in that world, it’s like, “What are you talking about?” But basically the way that these broker-dealers make money, it seems like there’s been a pretty big differential in the exchange of value where advisors now get more services, better technology, get more money to join them and get it at a lower cost. Do you agree? Joshua Tomolak: I absolutely agree. I think that maybe that’s one of the larger changes that we’ve seen, and it’s probably one of the benefits from a lot of the industry consolidation on that independent broker-dealer side. The economies of scale of these folks have allowed them to increase their tech spend, increase their service capacities all while offering it to the advisors at a cheaper price. And when I was at TD Ameritrade, one of the biggest pitches was the idea of a 100% payout and you control the fixed expenses, your technology compliance, et cetera. But what’s changed is that broker-dealers are pretty darn comparable on the expenses. All of those admin fees and things you mentioned will still exist, but they’re on a much smaller scale. And I think the question a lot of advisors are asking is, “Am I getting congruent value from my broker-dealer for what I pay for?” And while that answer might’ve been no a couple years ago, today the answer is more often yes. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I would agree. A lot of times we work with advisors who are starting an RIA or affiliating with an RIA or going to a BD and they see how big the deals are in the independent BD world and the payouts are really high and the fees are relatively low. And honestly, it is a hard decision or calculus to make, like, “How does it make sense for me to turn down this extremely lucrative deal when my ongoing economics are going to be somewhat similar in the BD world versus in the RIA space?” I think it’s just an interesting dynamic and we’ll get more into that distinction. One of the stars of the show right here is we’ve seen a ton of advisor movement across the industry. Our annual advisor transition report said that in 2025, over 11,000 experienced advisors changed firms, which is a large number. A lot of those numbers are within the independent world. So advisors who are 1099 through a BD or through an RIA transitioning to another platform or organization or starting an RIA. So why do you think we’re seeing so many advisors reconsider their current firm or their platform or their broker-dealer today than in years past? Joshua Tomolak: It’s a jarring number. 11,000 is definitely a significant amount of advisor movements. To me, it comes down to a few things, but I will say that it’s almost always a conglomeration of pushes and pulls. Pushes being inherent frustrations with your status quo, pulls being the new sexy, shiny things that you see in the marketplace that could be really impactful for your business. To me, it typically comes down to one of three things, at least on the push front, that drives advisors to movement. Service being number one, technology being number two, and economics being number three. And if we were just going to unpack those, I think service being, “Can you call somebody that knows your business, that knows your name? Are you getting the correct answers? Are you being pushed through a phone tree? And even if you’re not doing it, is it taking up a meaningful amount of time of your staff’s free time?” On the technology front, there’s very significant tech spends happening in the industry right now. I think Raymond James and LPL reported, for example, they spent 500 million in 2025 on a tech spend. So advisors are going to the places that are making their life easier. People are looking for a mechanism to really scale their business without having to add staff and a lot of expenses to the bottom line. And technology is just the fastest, most efficient way to do that most times. And then economics, certainly a lot of advisors and teams have built phenomenal businesses and they’ve made a great living without really stressing out about the economics. And they eventually get to a point in their business where what they were giving up as a million dollar producer is far different than what they’re giving up as a $4 million producer. And back to the congruent value, it perhaps stops to make as much sense. Louis Diamond: Well said. I always say when the cost-to-value ratio is out of whack, that’s when advisors sit up and take notice. And not to name names of firms, but there definitely are firms that are more expensive. And even if you look at how much a wirehouse or a Ed Jones advisor paid their firm, it’s like, “What got me here is not necessarily what’s going to get me there.” And while the name on the business card, the resources were incredibly impactful, and I’m so grateful for what my firm, my broker-dealer did for me when I was just starting or when I was smaller. Now the business is bigger, I rely upon different resources or I don’t need the firm as much. So I’d rather plow the cost savings either into income for myself or invest it in areas that are most germane to my business. And it’s usually when that kind of light bulb moment goes off, that’s one of the major pushes that cause advisors to evaluate other options. So I agree with you, those are the major push factors, but then what are the pull factors? What are the major advancements or changes across the independent space that’s causing advisors to say, “Hey, okay, I might have some frustrations, but at the same time, I also need to find something that’s more than marginally better than the firm I’m at. Otherwise, why am I going to go through the hassle, take the risk, et cetera? So what are some of the pull factors that advisors are latching onto today? Joshua Tomolak: Sure. And I might say with one final push factor, there’s a straw that breaks the proverbial camel’s back when you’ve been told for however many years that this change or that change is coming down the pipeline and it never happens. And it translates well into the pull factors is do they do what they say they’re going to do? The talking points really for the pull factors are exactly the same. So the counterpoint to service is perhaps having a direct relationship with the chief compliance officer at a firm or having a dedicated service representative that knows their stuff inside and out and can get you the answer even if they don’t know it off the top of their head. Having the technology to rebalance a household in two clicks instead of two hours. In economics, I think it’s really a transparency of economics. We’ve both worked with some really significant firms that have looked at their P&Ls and said, “where the heck is the money going?” And we’ve looked at the same P&Ls and said, “I have no idea,” because it’s so convoluted. People are happy to pay for good service, good technology, good products, but they just want to know where the money’s coming from. So I think it’s a yin and yang. The same things that they’re the push are often the pull. Louis Diamond: Definitely. I’ll give you a couple other from my perspective. I’ll say first specific to the independent BD world, and then we’ll dive into the RIA, I think it’s a little bit different. But I think some other will say innovations or changes that are causing advisors to really perk up and listen and really make the case to themselves that life will be better at this new organization than the status quo or staying put. We’ve seen major advancements in transition support, whether it’s being able to do a transition without a shred of paper, being able to… I mean, we’ve seen some independent advisors move their entire book within two weeks, which never would’ve happened before. So the firms that I’d say are playing offense, the larger firms that are winning, they have insane headcount around transitions and are always investing in technology, whether now on the AI front or in general. And we’ve seen transitions, they’re never easy. So that’s not a comment to say it’s easy, but a lot of the friction, a lot of the manual work has been taken away, which is massive. You definitely mentioned the significant technology spend. I mean, just the innovations going on across the industry. There’s definitely some firms that are laggards on technology and others that are light years ahead, whether because their tech is more integrated or they’ve built out their platform to be more, we’ll say modular, to plug in different third-party softwares where an advisor can really customize and create their own tech stack. I think there’s been some changes on compliance. It used to be if you’re at an independent BD, you had to be the OSJ by yourself or you had to roll up under an OSJ. But now most BDs offer home office supervision, so a big friction or pain point is taken away. And then I’ll give you a bridge to talk about what we’re seeing on the RIA side. But we’ve also seen, I would say, a real blurring of the lines between what you would traditionally think of as an independent broker dealer versus what was an RIA. So whether it’s an internal pathway where it’s like, “Start off on our independent BD platform, get the big deal, get the support, but then you can ditch that and just use this as a custodian or you can sell the business to us when you want to retire and convert to W2.” So in that vein, transitioning internally to an RIA, give me the same points like, “What are the major advancements or changes you’re seeing on the RIA side today?” Joshua Tomolak: I love that you said that because it’s been one of the most interesting changes to watch. Independent broker dealers becoming more like RIAs, and to your point, being more flexible, having more optionality, a more curated experience in some cases. And in many cases becoming closer to independent broker dealers with some of these massive shops that we’ve seen be created over the last five years that now have hundreds, if not thousands of advisors. To your question on the internal RIA slide as we sometimes call it, this really didn’t exist many places a few years ago. And I think it’s been created as both originally a retention tool in many places for the advisors that were with a major independent broker dealer and they ultimately wanted to have their own ADV and their own RIA. And the firm didn’t want to lose all the assets to an independent custodian so they gave them the green light to… And it’s ultimately became a sales tool in many cases. Just to use a couple of examples across the industry, I mean, Raymond James has Raymond James Custody Services, which has attracted a lot of really sophisticated teams. I know Wells Fargo Finance done something similar and even the counterparts over at Cetera and Osaic are trying to do the same thing. So it’s a recognition in my view that we want to keep the best talent possible. And if these folks are ultimately going to go RIA anyway, it’s less about the money and more about the flexibility and control that it offers them. So what can we do to keep those folks on board? And rightfully so, a lot of senior management of these firms have said, “Let’s not lose these teams. It’s going to be a lower margin business for us, but at the rate that they’re growing, it’s going to pay off in the long run.” Louis Diamond: Well said. RIAs are now more mainstream. And some of these RIAs, they’re either resembling independent BDs or I would even go so far to say the valuations that are even publicly available on some RIAs is definitely having people take notice. I mean, Cerity Partners recently raised capital at an over $8 billion reported valuation. Crescent was well over a billion. Firms like Mariner, Creative Planning, Mercer, Wealth Enhancement Group, and there’s many that I’m missing, are all worth a couple billion dollars or more and growing. Do you think that’s had an impact on the legitimacy or the staying power of the RIA model? Joshua Tomolak: Oh, absolutely. There’s no doubt about it. I mean, those groups that you mentioned and many more are winning some of the biggest teams on the street. I mean, if you pull up a run-of-the-mill advisor hub article, for example, you’ll see as many of those RIAs win significant businesses as you will their broker-dealer counterparts, partially in my opinion, due to the massive valuations these firms are fetching. And it’s much more of a partnership in the sense that joining a Crescent or a Wealth Enhancement Group, as you mentioned, you’re a part of a boutique group of maybe a couple of hundred very sophisticated high-producing advisors all playing under the same banner, all rowing in the same direction, and that creates substantial growth. Louis Diamond: Exactly right. I think two other things to me that’s driving the legitimacy or the growth of the RIA segment, there’s so many different outsourcing solutions that have popped up, whether it’s more of a… We’ll say a bundled or a package outsourcing solution through firms like Dynasty and Sanctuary. LPL has done a ton with having a shared services outsourcing model. So you have those. But you also have, I mean, probably 10 different firms I could think of that can be an outsourced chief compliance officer. You have tons of marketing agencies that specialize in helping RIAs. You have all these FinTechs popping up to support the RIA space. Really, it’s like anything and everything can be outsourced now. And even the big Wall Street banks like UBS, Merrill, et cetera, they’re attempting to sell and distribute product into the RIA space. Venture funds, private equity funds, anyone you talk to is trying to get a piece of the RIA space, which means there’s more product and platform availability than ever before. And I think it’s massive because one, it’s a catalyst for teams who say, “I love everything about the RIA world. I just don’t want to do it on my own,” or, “I don’t know where to start.” But also it means that they can look their clients in the eye and say, “Hey, not only do I have the same stuff that I had for you at XYZ firm, I can actually do more for you.” And even if you look at what the custodians are doing on the lending side now, Schwab owning a bank is massive and being able to facilitate mortgages, securities-backed loans, things that didn’t really exist in the past. I think it’s a very exciting time for advisors either that are independent or are considering the independent space because you have all these choices and it’s really like, “Choose your own adventure. Give me your top five things you want.” I’m sure it exists and we can find it and make it happen. And I don’t think we’d have the same confidence in that statement 5, 7, 10 years ago. Joshua Tomolak: I couldn’t agree more. That’s such a huge development is the marketplace of third party vendors in any kind of capitalism environment. There’s problems that people encounter and there’s really smart people that are trying to make a lot of money that go to market to solve them. And we’ve seen a ton of that over the last few years. Louis Diamond: Exactly right. Yeah, it’s like also… If an advisor looks around and says, “Hey, this is what I want,” and it doesn’t exist, oftentimes that’s a light bulb moment to be like, “Okay, I’ll go build it. I’ll do it on my own.” Whether it was Stewart Partners when they launched a number of years ago or Hightower, Dynasty, et cetera. They were all started by people that said, “Hey, I see a big gap in the ecosystem. Let’s create a business and raise capital to go solve it and then deliver this service to other like-minded advisors or business owners.” Honestly, it’s a treat to be able to watch all this happen in real time. We probably should have laid the groundwork with this next question, but I think it’s an important one. What’s the difference between a independent broker-dealer and an RIA? Really basic foundational. It sounds like the lines are blurred. There’s probably a lot of similarities. Advisors are successful in both. It’s not like one’s better than the other. How would you explain the differences, if a client of ours asked, “What’s the difference between an independent broker-dealer and IBD versus an RIA”? Joshua Tomolak: Get into the core of it. Again, the lines are blurred, and I’ll stay very high level on the strategic differences, but I like to use this example. I drive a Toyota Tundra. Really like the truck, gets me from A to B. Now, if I were getting to a point where I wanted a new vehicle, if I were to go get another Toyota Tundra because I really like a lot of aspects of it, but I want the one with the bigger screen and the bigger tires and the power seats, and I have rolled down windows because I have a fear of drowning. But if I want a lot of the bells and whistles, but I want to keep the foundation, that’s what I align to a independent broker-dealer to independent broker-dealer. You like the foundation of everything all under one roof. You like a lot of the resources, but you have some meaningful frustrations and you want to see if another provider in the market can solve for those or you can upgrade. If I instead, Louis, decided that I wanted a sports car or a Jeep Wrangler or something, I would be looking at a different category altogether. That’s how I articulate the platform space. They provide the same services and support in many cases that an independent broker-dealer does, think of marketing and a tech stack and regulatory oversight and a fellowship in a community, but they’re built on an RIA TC registered chassis. They’re typically far more customized so you can shop the street to get a lot more of the things that you like, though you are walking away from maybe some of the things that you’ve liked in the independent broker-dealer model. So I guess that’s the highest level I might explain it, just a little bit more minutia in any broker-dealer is going to be a FINRA registered, FINRA member broker-dealer. So they’re subject to the FINRA rules, which basically means it’s the compliance interpretation of those rules that they have to follow. So LPL’s rules may be slightly different than Cetera’s than Ameriprise’s because it’s based on their interpretations of the rules. In the RIA space, everybody really operates on the fiduciary standard. So it’s just a different lens that from a compliance standpoint, business is looked at. And a lot of people would make the argument that it’s just easier to get things done when you’re looking at something from that lens. I might’ve gone too compliance nerd on you there, but I’d be curious what you think some of the major differences are. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I think that’s right. I mean, it sounds like if you’re in the RIA world in some capacity that you as the advisor or business owner are going to have a little bit more control and autonomy and flexibility. One, do you think that’s true? And what are the reasons why that is? Is it platform? Is it strictly just compliance is easier? What are the different ways that an RIA would have more or less flexibility than someone who’s with an independent BD? Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, I think it’s overwhelmingly true, but it certainly depends on your business. Within most RIA platforms, you’re going to be one of a couple dozen, maybe a couple hundred, where you’re going to have people within that firm that really know your business. So the experience in getting things done is much less about, “Can I do this,” or, “Can I not do this?” And it’s, “Louis, I understand you asked for this. We’re going to run into these issues, but let’s figure out how to get to yes.” So it’s far more curated by people that are not operating on black and white rules and can actually figure out how to get to yes for your business. The other thing I would say is that most significant RIA platforms have multiple custodial options. So many times you’ll see as few as two or as many as five. So if an advisor or a team is trying to bring on a new piece of business or do something creative, that might be something they can use a different custodial relationship to accomplish. It might be something that Goldman Sachs does really well but is in its infancy at Fidelity, or it might be international business that’s approved on Pershing’s platform but not Schwab’s platform. So the RIA partner that you’re with can really look at those custodians agnostically and say, “What’s the best home for this business? What’s the best way to get this done for Louis?” There’s a couple examples of where I see the flexibility in practice. Louis Diamond: Yeah, I think one more too would be the concept of being able to shop the street. I’ve heard it described as becoming a buy-side advocate for your clients versus being a professional seller. So meaning, if I’m affiliated with an RIA or I’m operating my own RIA, there’s no selling away like there is at a wirehouse or at certain BDs. So if I have a client who’s trying to get a $10 million loan for a new building that they’re breaking ground on, if I’m at UBS, Merrill, Morgan Stanley, captive to a BD, I can go to my firm and say, “Hey, this $10 million loan, here it is. What are the terms? What are the rates? Will you take on this business?” And the firm will say, “Yes. No. Yes, here are the terms. Here’s the caveats, et cetera.” But it’s a very closed market process and an advisor has to live and die by what their firm says. Versus in the RIA world, it’s, “Okay, I have relationships with nine different banks and I can go to these different banks and private credit funds and whoever and really create either an option process for my client or really just help them in a fully agnostic open way.” And we see the same thing when it comes to alternative investments. No one at a wirehouse, let’s say, is complaining that they don’t have enough alts that they can offer clients. Those firms have done an amazing job with really boiling the ocean and having tons and tons of options for private investments, hedge funds, et cetera. But if you’re in the RIA world, you can take it to the next level and say, “Hey, this $3 million startup company that my friend is starting, I’m going to help them raise capital,” or, “My client wants to get a syndicate of investors together to have a direct investment into a qualified opportunity zone fund that they’re starting. Let’s do it when we can advise on it.” So it really expands what an advisor is able to do on behalf of clients. Like to me, that’s the most interesting or exciting part of the RIA model. You can get some of that within the BD world, but to me, when an advisor’s business becomes more sophisticated as far as what their end client’s needs are, it tends to translate better to the RIA world than the BD world. Not to say there aren’t ultra-high net worth focused advisors at BDs, but because of that additional flexibility, autonomy, customization, et cetera, that speaks more RIA. So again, absolutely not down at all on the independent BDs because I think there’s a massive home for them. Josh, let me turn it back to you. I’m rambling now. Give me the pitch for an independent BD. What are the things that are misperceptions that people have? What are the advantages that an independent broker dealer like an LPL or a RayJ or a Cetera have over RIAs or over other models in general? Joshua Tomolak: Absolutely. And I’d say I’ve learned more over the last six years from some of your ramblings than most people learn in an MBA course, so keep doing what you’re doing. But it’s funny being in this position now, having spent so much time sort of selling against the IBD model within TD Ameritrade, but what I’ve learned is it’s a good home for everybody. And a lot of times the advisors that they’re entrepreneurial enough where they like having their name on the door, but they’re not so entrepreneurial where they want to build everything out themselves, that’s where the independent broker dealers absolutely kill it. Their economics have gotten to a point where they’re really competitive. They offer transition capital that isn’t even going to be comparable in the RIA space unless you’re selling a minority share of your business. And you mentioned LPL, or we could really list all of the major ones, there’s not a department that they don’t have. It could be as nuance as finding 403(b) payroll slots or it could be as mainstream as fixed income or setting up events. There are all kinds of really neat departments that these all under one roof independent broker dealers have invested in. And a lot of times they make an effort to make you very much aware of all of the support because most people don’t use it. So I would say for the advisors that are looking to get their improved Toyota Tundra, then you can get probably 70 or 80% of what you want within the independent broker-dealer world. And you can also keep 20 or 30% of the stuff, maybe more that you really liked at your previous firm. So I think that’s where it really shines. I sometimes call it an incremental change rather than a transformational change. But for many advisors, incremental is really good enough if you get to keep the familiarity of how you’ve been doing business for the last 20-some years, but you’re able to get net improvement on the things that were really bothering you. Louis Diamond: Well said. Something that I’ve seen that’s been… I guess this could be either pro or con depending upon the advisor, but with some broker dealers, letting an advisor co-brand with them or really having a real consumer-facing brand, whether it’s, “I’m a franchise owner with Ameriprise,” or, “I’m independent through Raymond James,” or, “Running my own practice through Wells Fargo FiNet,” or, “I’m independent with Northwestern Mutual.” There’s definitely some brand cache or brand familiarity with some of those firms that may or may not be the same if you’re in the RIA world. So I would agree there’s a lot to like about the independent BD world and there’s a fit for people that is absolutely better with independent BDs than on the RIA side. Even if some people would say RIA is better, we’re cleaner, I wouldn’t say that. To me, it’s all about what an advisor’s goals are and then matching that up with what these firms do. And there’s never a perfect option. I jokingly say, “If there was a perfect firm, we wouldn’t be in business.” Every firm has their advantages or disadvantages. And depending upon where an advisor’s coming from, their style of business, their pain points, that’ll match up really well with on firm or one type of firm or one model than the other. Let’s pivot a little bit to the RIA world. A lot of your comments have been more about advisors affiliating or joining RIAs, this whole supportive version of independence concept. But what about advisors who want to go and start their own RIA? Either they’re leaving a captive firm and taking the entrepreneurial route and starting their own firm, or they’re leaving an independent BD to go start their own RIA. What do you see as some of the biggest misconceptions that advisors have about that move? Joshua Tomolak: That’s probably my favorite topic because there are the most misconceptions I think in this space. Louis Diamond: I’d agree. Joshua Tomolak: And I would say there’s 9 out of 10 conversations that I have with advisors and teams, they start off with the launching an RIA in mind or at least RIA curious and they want to understand what’s out there. And probably less than half the time do these folks end up actually launching their own RIA, which is okay because the ones that do are massively successful and they know they’re dang sure that’s exactly what they want to do. I think it gets a little bit romanticized sometimes that they’ll say, “Oh, I’ll just give Schwab a call,” or, “I’ll just give the custodian a call,” as if they were shopping independent broker dealers. That’s fine. You can do that and they will help you, but there’s quite a bit more to think about. And it’s not, in my opinion, the same as evaluating independent broker dealers. If it’s all right, I was taught the four pillars of the RIA model. I can go through that with you really quickly. So the way to think about the RIA space is in four pieces. And shout out to a friend, Eli Suarez, that taught me this years ago. The first pillar… Thinking of four pillars on a bar stool, if you will. The first one being administration. And this is your compliance, this is setting up your ADV, your LLC, all of your business formation documents. The second piece being technology, what do you actually want to use? Because the benefits of the broker-dealer world and the supported independent world is they’ve already built it for you. They’ve already paid for it and scraped their knees building it. In this case, you have to. And for some people, that’s really exciting to source financial planning software and portfolio management software and your CRM and tax software, et cetera. For some people, it just sounds like a huge headache. The third pillar being custodians. I have them third because you want to make sure that the right custodian can integrate properly with the technology that you’ve sourced that you’re passionate about. And then ultimately transition. What does a transition really look like? What are my legal and regulatory requirements? How does this work? What are the timelines? Things of that nature. So I guess I would say in closing that if those four things are things that you really want to own, then you’re in a really good position to consider an RIA launch. What do you think, Louis? Louis Diamond: I think that’s a great framework to break it down. Not just be like, “Okay, I can tolerate that,” or, “My team can do it,” but I think you have to be pretty excited about rolling up your sleeves and customizing and doing it yourself because in our experience, there’s a nominal differential between the economics of running your own RIA versus affiliating with an RIA or going to an independent BD. All the extra work and responsibility, you’re not really going to make it up, at least on the front end, on a higher net payout. So it has to be more about what the model means to you and having a vision that you don’t think anyone else can accomplish other than yourself. And looking at that crazy ever-expanding Michael Kitces’ FinTech map and there’s 500 different logos on it and being like, “Yes, that’s what I want. I want to go through this. I want to pick the seven pieces of my tech stack that work for me,” rather than getting, “Here’s the tech stack, take a demo, you like it, you don’t like it, take it or leave it.” To me, the two biggest misconceptions people have about the RIA world is one, “I’m going to have to be a full-time chief compliance officer,” and just that compliance is this boogeyman, this terrible, scary thing. In some ways it is. But the reality is most, especially startup RIAs will fully outsource compliance to a firm or they’ll hire a compliance consultant or firms that are big enough even will hire a CCO or repurpose someone on their team to be CCO. But compliance is much more streamlined and simpler than BD compliance. And ultimately, it’s compliance that’s being built for your business rather than compliance that’s being built for a publicly traded multinational company that supports 20,000 financial advisors. So I think compliance is always a big misconception. It’s definitely what a lot of firms will pry upon when they’re saying like, “Oh, you’re going to own all the legal and regulatory requirements. You could, but it’s definitely not a requirement.” And then I think another one is folks sometimes underestimate and overestimate the operational burden and how much work it is to start an RIA. Sometimes people just… They’re perfect for the RIA world, that’s their goal, but they get stopped in their tracks. They don’t really know what to do. But what we’ve seen, we said it earlier with so many different outsourcing solutions and different service providers that have popped up, if you have the fire in your belly to go build something, it doesn’t mean you’re doing it by yourself. I mean, that’s what firms like ours do. The custodians are very helpful. On the flip side though, I have seen advisors chasing payouts say, “Hey, I’m just going to go start an RIA because I want to make another 1 to 3%,” or whatever it comes to and they drastically underestimate what it really takes to build a successful firm. Joshua Tomolak: Exactly right. I think that’s my favorite one, Louis, overestimating and estimating the operational burden there is you could have the same conversation with two teams and it can go the completely different direction. Louis Diamond: Josh, let’s wrap here. I got one more question for you that I think is an exciting one, but give me three key trends or storylines that most people don’t know about or aren’t talking about that you’re passionate about or that you’re sharing with advisors or counseling today. Joshua Tomolak: Sure. This is the free advice portion. And I’ll tell you what, Louis, if it’s all right with you, I’ll give you two and I would love to hear one from you as well. The first one I’ve seen in both the independent broker-dealer and RIA space is the minority investor concept. A lot of folks will talk about the idea of taking chips off a table and starting to partially monetize your business. I think that’s all important, but what I’ve found is that a lot of advisors really want their partner, whether it’s an RIA broker dealer to help them grow. And that could be with M&A opportunities, that could be with traditional recruitment of advisors, that could be building a business plan. But the minority investment part really helps accelerate that for a lot of businesses because all of a sudden, not only are you cashing out a small part of your business, but you’ve just created an ally with the parent entity, it is now much more likely to help you grow in that capacity because they’re insulated from it and they profit when you profit. So I think it’s easy to be shortsighted and say, “Well, my equity’s going to keep growing. Why would I sell you a piece of this?” But I counsel folks often to really think about what that long-term strategic partnership is and making somebody a real equity partner rather than just a vendor that provides you with technology and regulatory coverage. The other one I’d say is that… And this one’s really important to me, that business formation is far more important than your assets under management. Said a different way, the way you build your business is going to make your business far more valuable than the number of dollars underneath your name. And what I mean by that is, just to use an example, a sophisticated, well-built, centralized, scalable and repeatable business, whether it’s an RIA with a broker-dealer that is going to fetch a far higher M&A multiple than a OSJ that’s five times the size that just has a bunch of 1099 independent advisors underneath the umbrella. What we’ve seen in the M&A space is that if you’re going to shell out 50, 60, $80 million for somebody’s business, you want to know that you have this business for the long term. So I would certainly counsel people that have been around maybe far longer than me to take a look at how you’re building this and put together a business plan on what those next 10 years should look like and not necessarily fall into the trap where your only revenue source is the override that you receive from a firm and then you in turn pay to the advisors on your team. Louis Diamond: Well said. I really like that line. We’d probably do a whole episode on what are the tips and tricks for building a business with the end in mind? Like the Covey quote, “Begin with the end in mind.” Transitions are like… They’re a bear. I mean, there’s no way to sugarcoat it. Advisors, when they hear transition, if you ask them, “Don’t think about it, give me your reaction.” “Terrible, risky, a lot of work. I’ll never do it again. My friend did it and it was terrible. What if my clients don’t come?” It’s all these negative emotions. And in many cases, I don’t blame an advisor because it is a big act. But to me, if someone is weighing making a transition, whether a wholesale business model change going from being an employee to being independent, going from being an advisor at an independent BD to starting an RIA, or even going independent BD to independent BD, it’s an opportunity if you rise to the occasion to build with this next act with intentionality. So whether it’s restructuring compensation for your team, converting people from 1099 to W2, putting in place new workflows, changing how investments, instead of it being each individual advisor doing investments to more of a centralized model, cleaning up workflows, really investing in data, investing in AI. It’s something that I think, again, we can have a whole episode on it, but I think it’s a great one. Build the business the right way. And obviously, businesses that are larger, theoretically, sell for more, but we’ve certainly seen businesses that are half the size of a larger one sell for a similar amount or more because they did all the right things and the larger one did the things that really turn off a buyer or detract from a valuation. Let me give you one more and tell me if you agree, but I think we’re in this moment when Altruist, the upstart, a new kid on the block custodian, they launched a basically tokenization of cash in a way to automatically agentically source or sort cash to the highest yielding money market. And you’re like, “This is fricking wonky. Louis, why are you telling us this?” I think this is an important one just to keep a watchful eye on. I have no idea how this is going to shake out, but really the biggest way that independent BDs or even custodians like Schwab and Fidelity really make money, it’s not on their overrides from practices or the admin fee or the custody fee. It’s really on net interest margin. So how much the broker-dealer or the firm is making on client cash and brokerage accounts relative to what they’re paying out the client. It’s essentially like free margin to these firms. And this concept, I think, has massive potential for disruption for the business model. Again, I don’t know what it’s going to look like, whether it means platform fees that are instituted at all these firms, whether it means certain models would be more beneficial than others, whether it means nothing’s going to change, which is probably the right answer given this industry. But it’s something to keep a watchful eye on just if your firm institutes a new platform fee or there’s a fundamental way in which your firm can no longer make money. How are they going to make it up? Are they now going to be uncompetitive? They’re not going to have as much scale or profits to invest in the platform. Is it going to cause even more consolidation in the industry? So to me, that’s the one pretty under the radar, pretty wonky storyline that I don’t think enough people are talking about, but has the biggest possibility for disruption across their space than anything I’ve seen in a while. Joshua Tomolak: Sure. That’s the whole iceberg. Not a lot of people are talking about it. It’s not poking out of the ocean, but it’s going to be continuously brought up. I think it’s a question that a lot of advisors are going to have to ask these firms. And at the end of the day, the firms aren’t the bad guys. They have to make money too to provide a quality product. So where the money comes from matters. Louis Diamond: Exactly. Josh, this has been awesome. I learned a lot talking with you and just having your objective consulting hat on what I think are really the differences between IBD and RIA and some of the key trends and storylines to watch has been instrumental. I’ll also give a plug that on our website and we’ll link to it in the show notes, we have a really helpful one-page reference guide going through the differences between independent BDs or IBDs and RIAs. So feel free to click on it. We’ll make sure it gets in your inbox. Josh, thanks again for joining us today. Joshua Tomolak: Yeah, thanks for having me, Louis. It was a pleasure. 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 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. IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence A conversation with Louis Diamond and Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services at Diamond Consultants.      Louis Diamond: Welcome to the latest episode of our podcast series for financial advisors. Today’s episode is IBD vs. RIA: A Special Industry Update on Independence. It’s a conversation with Josh Tomolak, our Vice President of Independent Advisor Services. 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: For a long time, going independent would suggest the destination. Today, it’s often the beginning of a different conversation. As the independent space has matured, advisors have more choices than ever before. Broker-dealers have expanded their capabilities. The RIA ecosystem has become increasingly sophisticated. Capital is more readily available and support models now exist that would’ve been difficult to imagine a decade ago. The result is that many advisors who are already independent are taking a fresh look at whether their current affiliation still aligns with what they’re trying to build. My guest is Josh Tomolak, Vice President of Independent Advisor Services here at Diamond Consultants and our resident expert on independence. Josh spends his days helping advisors evaluate independence in all its forms from independent broker dealers, the fully independent RIAs and everything in between. And his knowledge is critical because the distinction between these models is often blurred. Many broker dealers now offer pathways to greater autonomy while supported independence has made RIA ownership more accessible than ever before. So the question is no longer simply, “Do I want to go independent?” The question is, “What kind of independence makes the most sense for client, business, and go

With markets reeling after another flare up in U.S.-Iran tensions, earnings from Apple and Amazon are in focus. GDP and PCE reports also await as investors digest the Fed's pause. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Listener questions take over the studio as Don and Tom work through a very big pile without sacrificing any more forests than necessary. The quick tour runs from life insurance in retirement to the seductive yield on floating-rate bank-loan ETFs—and why extra income usually comes with extra risk.Then a live call turns asset allocation into an actual retirement plan: how a couple can move from 90/10 to 70/30, use Roth space intelligently, and rebalance without guessing what the market will do next. The hosts also weigh simplifying banking at Fidelity or Schwab, the Social Security shortfall, and the limits of retiring at 53 on a $2.8 million 401(k).It's a brisk, practical Q&A about making portfolios safer, simpler, and realistic—plus expensive vacations, old television, and the strange persistence of paper.00:00 A special midweek Q&A03:29 Life insurance after retirement06:47 The risk behind high-yield bank-loan ETFs11:12 Bonds inside Roth accounts13:14 Moving a portfolio from 90/10 to 70/3022:54 Spending more after years of saving25:18 Consolidating banking at a brokerage26:53 How to repair Social Security31:10 Can $2.8 million fund retirement at 53?Questions? Comments? Click!

Microsoft, Meta, and other AI-linked stocks' earnings may carry more weight than usual amid a chip-led tech sell-off. The Fed meeting also looms with inflation remaining stubborn. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Earnings from Visa, Boeing, KLA Corporation, Seagate, and more will be in focus today as investors continue their rotation away from AI darlings ahead of tomorrow's Fed meeting. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Follow Elias on Twitter (X)Follow GWP on InstagramConnect with Elias on Linkedin Join the Newsletter  Three years ago, Growing Wealth Platform wasn't a startup.It was a podcast recorded in a bedroom in New Jersey.The goal was simple: document what I was learning about building wealth and make it easier for young adults to take action.In this episode, my co-founder Elias Wambugu and I share the story behind how that podcast evolved into Growing Wealth Platform—and the lessons we've learned while building it.We talk about: How GWP started as a podcast with help from my friend Jomar.  How Elias and I met after moving to San Francisco.  Why finding the right co-founder takes time.  The cost of building a startup and what it really takes to keep going.  Why talking to users forced us to rethink our product.  How our original AI consumer assistant evolved into an AI platform for financial advisors.  The Schwab meeting that changed how we thought about financial advice.  The thinking behind the GWP Score and our onboarding experience.  How we're helping advisors spend less time gathering information and more time giving advice.  How young adults can measure, benchmark, and improve their financial progress.  Why distribution matters just as much as building. If you're building a company, trying to grow your wealth, or curious about what really happens behind the scenes of a startup, this episode is for you.Disclaimer: The content provided in this episode is for educational purposes only. It is not intended as, and shall not be construed as, financial or investment advice. Any strategies, tips, or information shared in this episode are solely for the purpose of general knowledge and discussion. Listeners are encouraged to consult with qualified financial professionals and conduct their own research before making any financial decisions. The hosts and guests do not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of the information presented. Investments involve risk, and past performance is not indicative of future results. Listeners should exercise caution and discretion when considering any financial actions, and their personal circumstances and goals should always be taken into account.

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:

A Fed rate decision and a crowded earnings and economic calendar feature this week. Highlights include GDP and PCE data as well as earnings from Microsoft, Meta, Apple, and Amazon. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Interview recorded - 23rd of July, 2026On this episode of the WTFinance podcast I had the pleasure of welcoming back Liz Ann Sonders. Liz Ann Sonders is the Chief Investment Strategist at Charles Schwab, one of the most widely followed voices in markets, known for cutting through noise with rigour and clarity rather than hype.During we the conversation we spoke about the economic overview, secular shifts in the markets, economic strength, global markets and more. 0:00 - Introduction2:56 - Overview of the economy and markets4:28 - Secular shift8:10 - Market is frothy10:31 - Underperforming segments13:03 - Economic strength15:31 - No rate hike19:58 - Warsh impact25:41 - Market concerns?29:17 - Global Markets31:44 - One message to takeaway?Liz Ann Sonders has a range of investment strategy responsibilities, from market and economic analysis to investor education, all focused on the individual investor.Liz Ann is the cohost of the On Investing podcast and a keynote speaker at numerous company and industry conferences. Liz Ann is regularly quoted in financial publications including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Barron's, and the Financial Times, and she appears as a regular guest on CNBC, Bloomberg, Yahoo! Finance, Fox Business News, and the Schwab Network. Barron's has named her to its "100 Most Influential Women in Finance" every year since the list's inception, and Investment Advisor has included her on the "IA 25," its list of the 25 most important people in and around the financial advisory profession. Liz Ann has been named "Best Market Strategist" by Kiplinger's Personal Finance and one of SmartMoney magazine's "Power 30." Liz Ann has also been named to Forbes' 50 Over 50.In 1999, Liz Ann joined U.S. Trust—which was acquired by Schwab in 2000—as a managing director and member of its Investment Policy Committee. Previously, Liz Ann was a managing director and senior portfolio manager at Avatar Associates, an original division of the Zweig/Avatar Group. She holds an MBA in Finance from the Gabelli School of Business at Fordham University and a B.A. in Economics and Political Science from the University of Delaware.Liz Ann Sonders Website - https://www.schwab.com/learn/author/liz-ann-sondersTwitter - https://x.com/lizannsonders?s=21&t=vCJTBKSb-nIJ8eFKe0YAxgLinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/lizannsonders?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_appWTFinance -Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/wtfinancee/Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/67rpmjG92PNBW0doLyPvfniTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/wtfinance/id1554934665?uo=4Twitter - https://twitter.com/AnthonyFatseas

Suds and Schwab jump into the studio for the first true White Sox Therapy session of the season after the Sox drop two frustrating games at home to Houston.The guys recap an encouraging start to the second half, including road series wins in Toronto and Texas, Sean Burke's emergence, Davis Martin's recent struggles, and the Sox maintaining their lead in the AL Central.Topics include:The disastrous sixth innings against HoustonWhether Detroit and Minnesota will buy or sellKyle Teel's injury and the thin catching situationRock Cholowsky going first overallTrading Jacob Gonzalez for the pick used on Landon ThomeThe upside of Thome and Cole ProsakWhether the Sox should go all-in at the deadlinePotential targets such as Mason Miller and Michael KingWhether top prospects should be available for controllable pitchingThe Sox have been one of the best teams in the American League since mid-April, but the upcoming stretch against Houston, New York, Tampa Bay, and Boston could determine how aggressive Chris Getz becomes.Is this team ahead of schedule, or is this the moment to push the chips in?Sit back, relax, and strap it down, White Sox Therapy.

This week, Liz Ann Sonders and Collin Martin discuss one of the market's biggest themes, AI, and why the enormous capex spending on AI reinforces the importance of portfolio rebalancing. Liz Ann explains how AI-related companies now make up a significant share of major stock indexes and explores the risks that come with growing concentration in a handful of large-cap names. Rather than trying to predict which AI winners will emerge next, she highlights rebalancing as a disciplined way to trim outperformers, add to lagging areas, and maintain diversification. The conversation also touches on opportunities beyond the largest technology stocks, including equal-weight index funds, small-cap stocks, and quality-focused investing. On the fixed income side, Collin discusses how investors can think about rebalancing bond portfolios by balancing interest-rate risk and credit risk. He explains why investors sitting in cash or very short-term investments may be able to capture higher yields further out on the yield curve and why selective exposure to higher-quality corporate bonds may still make sense despite relatively tight credit spreads. Finally, Liz Ann and Collin discuss how inflation, AI-related investment spending, and the strength of the consumer could shape both Fed policy and market performance in the months ahead. 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.  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.  Lower rated securities are subject to greater credit risk, default risk, and liquidity risk. Diversification, rebalancing, and asset allocation strategies do not ensure a profit and do not protect against losses in declining markets. Rebalancing may cause investors to incur transaction costs and, when a non-retirement account is rebalanced, taxable events may be created that may affect your tax liability. Futures and futures options trading involves substantial risk and is not suitable for all investors. Please read the Risk Disclosure Statement for Futures and Options: https://www.schwab.com/Futures_RiskDisclosure prior to trading futures products. 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  (0726-KJ39) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Intel's results lightened the mood as chip demand stayed robust. This followed yesterday's market stumble as oil and yields rose, Tesla plunged, and AI spending worries mounted. 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. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Alphabet and Tesla delivered earnings late Wednesday, and reaction could affect trading today. Alphabet enjoyed firm cloud growth, but Tesla fell short as margin disappointed. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Few things reveal the strength of a couple's unity quite like money. Financial decisions touch nearly every part of married life—from daily spending and long-term planning to generosity, security, and the future. But money does not have to remain a source of tension. When couples approach their finances with transparency, shared purpose, and a biblical understanding of stewardship, money can become a tool that strengthens their marriage and supports what God has called them to do together. Dr. Art Rainer, founder of Christian Money Solutions and the Institute for Christian Financial Health, as well as the author of The Rich Couple: 30 Days of Following God's Design for a Financially Healthy Marriage, joins the show today to share that a “rich couple” has little to do with the size of a bank account. Instead, it means becoming rich in contentment, purpose, unity, and generosity. Redefining What It Means to Be Rich Our culture often defines a rich couple as one with a high income, an impressive home, or a large investment portfolio. But financial wealth can disappear, and continually chasing more often produces comparison rather than contentment. A truly rich couple recognizes that everything they have belongs to God. They understand that they are stewards—not owners—of the resources He has entrusted to them. That conviction changes the purpose of money. Instead of asking only, “How can we accumulate more?” couples can begin asking: How can we faithfully manage what God has provided? How can our finances reflect our shared values? How can we use what we have to serve others? What does contentment look like in this season? When contentment is rooted in Christ and financial decisions are guided by God's purposes, couples can experience a kind of richness that circumstances cannot easily take away. Moving From “Mine” and “Yours” to “Ours” Genesis 2:24 describes marriage as two people becoming one flesh. That oneness includes more than physical or emotional intimacy. It also shapes how couples view their possessions, income, debt, goals, and generosity. Marriage is a covenant, not merely a contract. Rather than guarding separate financial territories, a husband and wife can learn to approach money as teammates. Practically, this requires complete financial transparency. Both spouses should understand what the household earns, owes, owns, spends, saves, and gives. For many couples, this may involve shared accounts and passwords. For others, the account structure may differ, but openness and mutual accountability should remain nonnegotiable. Even language can reinforce unity. Saying “our income,” “our debt,” and “our generosity” reminds both spouses that they are working toward a shared future. A brief monthly financial meeting can also help. Couples can review their progress, discuss upcoming expenses, and make important decisions together. Establishing a spending threshold—an amount neither spouse spends without first consulting the other—can reduce surprises and build trust. Unity rarely happens accidentally. It grows through intentional habits. Remember That Marriage Is a Team Sport Your spouse should be your closest financial teammate. That does not mean you will always agree. Different personalities, experiences, and priorities will inevitably create tension. The goal is not to eliminate every disagreement but to remain committed to reaching decisions together. Couples should be able to discuss differences honestly in private while presenting a united front to outside voices. Advice from parents, friends, or children may be well-intentioned, but those voices should not undermine the marriage. A healthy response to an outside suggestion might simply be, “Thank you. We'll discuss it together and let you know.” That protects the couple's unity and reassures each spouse that decisions will not be reversed or weakened by someone else's opinion. Share Your Money Stories Many financial disagreements are not really about the transaction in front of you. They are rooted in earlier experiences. Perhaps one spouse grew up in a home where money was scarce and now feels anxious without a substantial emergency fund. The other may have grown up in a financially comfortable home and feel little concern about spending. One may naturally save, while the other prefers to spend, invest, or avoid financial decisions altogether. Sharing these stories can replace frustration with empathy. Instead of asking, “Why are you like this?” a spouse may begin to say, “Now I understand why this decision feels so important to you.” Consider asking each other: What is your earliest memory involving money? Discuss how that experience may still influence your attitudes toward spending, debt, saving, generosity, or risk. Listen without interrupting or trying to correct one another. Understanding your spouse's story does not mean every financial habit should remain unchanged. It does, however, create a more compassionate starting point for change. Address the Four Financial Dividers Four common problems can weaken financial unity in marriage: poor communication, selfishness, distrust, and unrealistic expectations. Poor communication can be addressed through regular conversations. Even a weekly 10-minute check-in can prevent small concerns from becoming major conflicts. Selfishness begins to fade when couples stop thinking primarily in terms of “my money” and start celebrating each other's progress. Distrust must be confronted with honesty. Hidden purchases, secret accounts, concealed debt, or missing information will erode intimacy. Financial transparency brings those issues into the light. Unrealistic expectations can be replaced with a shared plan. A realistic budget will not allow every desire to happen immediately, but it can help couples prioritize what matters most. Talk early, tell the truth, and pray often. Start With Your Hearts, Not the Budget When a marriage feels financially divided, opening a spreadsheet may not be the best first step. Begin with prayer. Ask God to help you become one, grow in contentment, understand each other, and steward His resources faithfully. Then spend a few minutes sharing your experiences and concerns without interrupting or judging one another. Finally, choose one small act of unity. You might schedule your first weekly money conversation, disclose an overlooked expense, agree on a giving goal, or deposit a small amount into a joint savings fund. One step will not resolve every financial disagreement. But small acts of faithfulness can create lasting momentum. A rich marriage is not defined by how much a couple possesses. It is marked by two people learning to trust God, care for one another, and manage His resources with unity and purpose. On Today's Program, Rob Answers Listener Questions: I'm retired and have a small IRA and some savings at Schwab. I also expect to inherit assets from an older family member. Since I won't need my IRA for living expenses, is there any advantage to keeping it? I'm struggling with $8,900 in credit card debt at a 23.49% APR and can't afford to pay it off right now. I've contacted my credit card company about hardship options and have looked into consolidation and personal loans, but I'm unsure what's best. Given my situation, what's the wisest way to tackle this debt? Resources Mentioned: Faithful Steward: FaithFi's Quarterly Magazine (Become a FaithFi Partner) The Rich Couple: 30 Days of Following God's Design for a Financially Healthy Marriage by Dr. Art Rainer The Money Challenge: 30 Days of Discovering God's Design For You and Your Money by Dr. Art Rainer Christian Money Solutions  Institute for Christian Financial Health Christian Credit Counselors Our Ultimate Treasure: A 21-Day Journey to Faithful Stewardship by Rob West Wisdom Over Wealth: 12 Lessons from Ecclesiastes on Money Look At The Sparrows: A 21-Day Devotional on Financial Fear and Anxiety Rich Toward God: A Study on the Parable of the Rich Fool Find a Certified Kingdom Advisor® (CKA) FaithFi App Remember, you can call in to ask your questions every weekday at (800) 525-7000. Faith & Finance is also available on Moody Radio Network and American Family Radio. You can also visit FaithFi.com to connect with our online community and partner with us as we help more people live as faithful stewards of God's resources. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Mega-caps Alphabet and Tesla report this afternoon. Chips rallied into Alphabet's results, possibly on hopes for big spending plans. But climbing yields and oil present headwinds. 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. (0131-0726) Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Tim Hinchliffe discusses the advancement of the global technocratic control grid highlighting the rollout of Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI), which integrates digital IDs, programmable currencies, and data centers into a centralized system of governance and includes digital embassies for nations who don’t possess their own compute. These interconnected technologies are being used by global institutions and governments to implement a totalitarian surveillance state that transcends national borders. Escape the Technocracy Live Workshop (w/ Geopolitics & Empire)! https://escapethetechnocracy.com/product-escape-the-technocracy-live-workshop-season-2 Watch on BitChute / Brighteon / Rumble / Substack / YouTube *Support Geopolitics & Empire! Become a Member https://geopoliticsandempire.substack.com Donate https://geopoliticsandempire.com/donations Consult https://geopoliticsandempire.com/consultation **Listen Ad-Free for $4.99 a Month or $49.99 a Year! Apple Subscriptions https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/geopolitics-empire/id1003465597 Supercast https://geopoliticsandempire.supercast.com ***Visit Our Affiliates & Sponsors! Above Phone https://abovephone.com/?above=geopolitics American Gold Exchange https://www.amergold.com/geopolitics Escape The Technocracy (15% off w/ GEOPOLITICS!) https://escapethetechnocracy.com/geopolitics Expat Money (FREE “WW3 Plan-B” Report!) https://expatmoney.com/geopolitics PassVult https://passvult.com Sociatates Civis https://societates-civis.com StartMail https://www.startmail.com/partner/?ref=ngu4nzr Wise Wolf Gold https://www.wolfpack.gold/?ref=geopolitics Websites X https://x.com/TimHinchliffe Sociable https://sociable.co About Tim Hinchliffe The Sociable editor Tim Hinchliffe covers tech and society, with perspectives on public and private policies proposed by governments, unelected globalists, think tanks, big tech companies, defense departments, and intelligence agencies. Previously, Tim was a reporter for the Ghanaian Chronicle in West Africa and an editor at Colombia Reports in South America. These days, he is only responsible for articles he writes and publishes in his own name. *Podcast intro music used with permission is from the song “The Queens Jig” by the fantastic “Musicke & Mirth” from their album “Music for Two Lyra Viols”: http://musicke-mirth.de/en/recordings.html (available on iTunes or Amazon)

Most investors think they're buying the same thing when they choose a target date fund—but two people who bought 2025 target date funds 15 years ago could have 40% different returns today. Same target year, wildly different outcomes. The culprit? Fund families structure these "simple" investments in dramatically different ways, and most investors never look under the hood. Key Topics Discussed Passive Investing vs Active Financial Planning (00:03:30) Cody explains why you should be a passive investor but an active financial planner in your own life, noting that 95% of active investors underperform broad index funds over time. Understanding Target Date Funds (00:08:15) How target date funds work as default 401(k) options, automatically shifting from aggressive to conservative allocations as retirement approaches along a predetermined glide path. Surprising Differences Between Target Date Funds (00:18:45) The revelation that identical retirement target years can produce vastly different outcomes depending on fund family—differences in international exposure, bond types, and allocation strategies compound over time. Comparing Fidelity, Schwab, and Vanguard Target Dates (00:24:00) Detailed breakdown of how three major fund families structure their target date index funds differently, with varying philosophies on diversification and risk management. The Hidden Costs of Target Date Funds (00:32:20) Analysis showing target date index funds cost 35% to 400% more than purchasing underlying index funds directly. Fidelity's target date index fund, for example, is four times more expensive than buying Fidelity's component funds separately. Static Allocation Funds Explained (00:38:10) Introduction to balanced funds that maintain constant allocations (like 60/40 stocks/bonds) regardless of your age or proximity to retirement. Target Maturity vs Constant Maturity Bond Funds (00:42:30) Deep dive into how target maturity bond funds differ from traditional bond index funds—all bonds mature in the same year, converting to cash automatically without requiring you to sell anything. The Seven-Year Bond Strategy (00:48:15) Cody's approach to determining bond allocation: calculate seven years of planned spending and hold that percentage in bonds. If you'll withdraw $40,000 annually from a $1 million portfolio, hold 28% in bonds ($280,000) and 72% in stocks. Bond Ladders and Behavioral Finance (00:55:00) How target maturity bond funds overcome psychological barriers to spending in retirement by eliminating the need to "sell" assets—bonds simply mature into cash when you need it. Simplicity vs Complexity in Portfolio Design (01:02:30) Cody shares his personal eight-fund retirement portfolio strategy, explaining why something that appears complex can actually feel simpler from a behavioral perspective. Notable Quotes Mike Piper, CPA (quoted by Cody Garrett, CFP®): "There is no perfect portfolio, but there are countless perfectly fine portfolios." Rick Ferri, CFA (quoted by Cody Garrett, CFP®): "The perfect portfolio is the one you're going to stick with. Maintaining discipline is the hardest part of investing." Cody Garrett, CFP®: "Once you understand what a target date fund is, you no longer need one." Cody Garrett, CFP®: "Investing is like a bar of soap. The more you touch it, the less there is." Brad Barrett: "Success in personal finance and investing comes down more to behavior, vastly more to behavior than it comes down to any type of knowledge or intelligence." Key Takeaways Review your 401(k) fund lineup and sort by expense ratio to identify the lowest-cost index fund options available to you If your 401(k) lacks low-cost index funds (under 0.10% expense ratio), contact your plan administrator to request they be added to the fund lineup Calculate how much money you plan to spend from your portfolio over the next seven years to determine your appropriate bond allocation Visit Morningstar.com and review the portfolio tab of any target date funds yo…