[ad_1]
Technology-stock gains drive big day, week on Wall Street
[ad_2]

[ad_1]
Shares of Microsoft Corp.
MSFT,
hiked up 2.4% afternoon trading Friday, toward its third record close in the past four sessions. The stock has now soared 12.6% over the past 11 sessions, in which is has gained 10 times, including a nine-day winning streak through Nov. 8 that was the longest such streak since the 9-day stretch that ended Nov. 19, 2019. During those 11 sessions, the stock has added $307.8 billion to its market capitalization. Microsoft is the second-largest component in the S&P 500
SPX,
with a market cap of $2.745 trillion, behind only Apple Inc.
AAPL,
at $2.891 trillion. The rally kicked off a couple days after Microsoft reported bumper quarterly results. Market research firm Bespoke Investment said Friday that Microsoft has joined Apple as the second individual company that has a larger market cap that the combined market caps of the companies that make up the Russell 2000 index
RUT,
of small-capitalization companies.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Shares of real-estate names plunged Tuesday following a jury ruling that has the potential to shake up the way people purchase homes.
A Missouri jury earlier Tuesday deemed that the National Association of Realtors, HomeServices of America and Keller Williams colluded to inflate or maintain high commission rates. Jefferies analyst John Conaltuoni said in a note to clients that a judge could issue an injunction preventing commission sharing on MLSs, or multiple listing services, which would hurt the buyer-agent business.
Shares of Opendoor Technologies Inc.
OPEN,
plunged 9% on Tuesday, while shares of Zillow Group Inc.
ZG,
Z,
fell 7%, shares of Redfin Corp.
RDFN,
dropped 6% and shares of RE/MAX Holdings Inc.
RMAX,
declined 4%.
Conaltuoni thinks the recent ruling could bring big changes to the Participation Rule, which is an NAR requirement for seller agents to disclose the compensation being offered to buyer agents when they list through an MLS. The Participation Rule could soon get banned or turn optional, in his view.
Such a ban “would cause negotiations about buyer agent commissions to occur when an offer is presented, since there would no longer be an avenue to communicate splits up front,” he wrote. “This would eliminate the seller’s incentive to compensate buyer agents, which would force them to seek compensation directly. Shifting the burden of payment to buyers would likely meaningfully reduce their use of agents given most already struggle to cover closing costs.”
Conaltuoni further commented that were the rule to become optional, the “status quo” likely would continue.
Read: Why aren’t homeowners selling their homes? It’s not just the ‘lock-in effect’
What would these developments mean for Zillow, which reports earnings Wednesday afternoon? He flagged that nearly two-thirds of the company’s revenue comes from its Premier Agent business, which itself is primarily made up of revenue from buyer agents. “[A] reduction in their usage would force [Zillow] to pivot to offering products for seller agents and create near-term headwinds to revenue,” he wrote, while cutting his price target on Zillow’s stock to $48 from $60.
Bernstein’s Nikhil Devnani wrote that Zillow “is NOT part of this case and not directly impacted by the ruling,” but there’s the potential for repercussions down the line.
“Premier Agent is built around buyer commissions,” Devnani said. “And a reduction to commission rates (which could happen if cooperative compensation were outright banned in the worst case scenario) would create challenges for industry revenue growth, in our view. Maintaining the current structure with more transparency would have less impact we believe. It would need a stronger decoupling of who pays for buyer and seller agents.”
While Redfin shares dropped Tuesday along with other names, Chief Executive Glenn Kelman put out a blog post titled: “Change Comes to the Real Estate Industry.”
“The judge may take days or weeks to decide what structural changes the jury’s verdict will entail,” he wrote, and appeals could take years.
But traditional brokers “will undoubtedly now train their agents to welcome conversations about fees, just as Redfin has been doing for years, especially when advising a seller on what fee to offer to buyers’ agents,” he continued. “Rather than saying that a fee for the buyers’ agent of 2% or 3% is customary or recommended, agents will say that a buyers’ agent fee, if one is offered at all, is entirely up to the seller. This is as it should be.”
RBC Capital Markets analyst Brad Erickson wrote after the ruling that just over half of Redfin transactions come from the buyside. Its stock and Zillow’s “partially reflected these risks coming in,” in his view.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
In 1989, author Marsha Sinetar wrote a bestselling book, “Do What You Love, The Money Will Follow.” She urges readers to pursue a career that stokes their passion.
Many advisers take that advice. They love what they do. And the money follows: Median pay for U.S. financial advisers was $95,390 in 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Lately, though, the passion is waning for some advisers. They still love the practice of wealth management — customizing financial plans, constructing client portfolios and analyzing the ever-growing menu of investment products.
They’re just not as enamored of their clients’ wealth. Reassuring wealthy retirees that they can afford to buy a second (or third) vacation home has its merits. But helping them accumulate more and more wealth rings hollow after awhile.
Steve Oniya, a Houston-based certified financial planner, works with a diverse mix of clients. He enjoys helping them achieve their goals, regardless of their net worth. “It’s more gratifying helping them get over some hurdles to get to the life that they really want,” he said. “You make more of an impact that way.”
He compares his work to a firefighter’s job. Some days, they rescue people from burning buildings. Other days, they put out a dumpster fire. Yet they’re always driven to excel and perform at a high level.
Nevertheless, if an adviser serves rich clients who hoard their money, don’t give to charity and lack perspective on what matters most in life, a day at the office can feel dispiriting. “Sometimes advisers may be passionately opposed to certain clients’ values,” Oniya said. “In those instances, end the relationship or limit the scope.”
Oniya said he does not find clients’ wealth objectionable. He sees his role as an ally who seeks to understand — and not judge — others’ beliefs and values.
“I like to stay in the neutral camp,” Oniya said. “It’s easy to empathize with another person and see they are a person who needs help just like others. We’re generally here to advise them on how to be more efficient and effective financially in attaining their goals.”
The arc of an adviser’s career comes into play as well. To build a practice, newly minted financial planners might welcome pretty much anyone with sufficient assets.
Once they establish a stable book of business, advisers may get picky in deciding whom to serve. Their onboarding process might get more rigorous in an effort to determine if they’re aligned with a potential client’s aspirations, goals and priorities.
Some advisers shift gears as they gain experience working with different types of clients. They come to realize what they like most about the job and adjust their practice — and the type of clients they serve — accordingly.
“Everyone evolves,” said Angeli Gianchandani, a professor of marketing at University of New Haven’s Pompea College of Business. “Advisers may see there’s a greater reward and opportunity helping people in a different income bracket.”
As a self-test, advisers at a career crossroads might want to ask themselves how they’d respond to two clients. The first one says, “You saved me $5 million. Now I want to save $10 million to buy a bigger yacht.”
The other says, “You helped me pay off my student debt” or “You helped me save enough for a down payment to buy my first house.”
“You may feel more valued and appreciated as an adviser” if you pave the way for someone who lacks vast wealth to build a nest egg for the future, Gianchandani says.
Advisers who have misgivings about helping wealthy people attain greater wealth are not alone. Brooke Harrington, a sociology professor at Dartmouth College, interviewed 65 wealth managers between 2007 and 2015. About one-quarter expressed qualms about helping lower ultra-wealthy clients’ tax liabilities.
Still, another 25% did not feel such qualms. They saw their role as defending their clients from an unjust tax code.
More: Wall Street legend Byron Wien dies at 90. Here are his ’20 life lessons’
Also read: The IRS is auditing the rich. Can you fly under the radar if you’re not wealthy?
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
It wasn’t clear Tuesday if Rep. Jim Jordan would be successful in his push to become the next speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, with a floor vote drawing near and the Ohio Republican needing the support of a majority of the chamber.
The narrowly divided chamber is expected to vote in the early afternoon to select a speaker, with the move coming after former Speaker Kevin McCarthy was ousted two weeks ago and after No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise ended his bid for the post last Thursday.
An ally of former President Donald Trump who secured his party’s nomination for the role on Friday, Jordan needs to have 217 votes in his favor, so he can only afford to have four fellow Republicans vote against him as no Democrats are expected to support him. The House has 221 Republicans and 212 Democrats, with two vacancies.
While Jordan racked up significant endorsements Monday, more than four House Republicans are on record as being against him and others are leaning toward “no” votes, as shown in the chart below that comes from a CNN producer.
McCarthy needed 15 rounds of voting in January to secure the speakership. The California congressman repeatedly saw around 20 fellow Republicans vote against him before finally prevailing.
There are “plenty of reasons to think” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jordan will “be able to grind it out once people are on record,” but the situation is still “unsettled,” said Liam Donovan, a former GOP operative who is now a principal at law and lobbying firm Bracewell, in a post on X.
One possible key is whether support for Jordan declines or not in a second round of voting, according to Matt Glassman, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Government Affairs Institute. He made that point in his post below.
Analysts have been discussing whether a Jordan speakership could mean a greater likelihood of a government shutdown that weighs on markets
SPX
in mid-November, when funding is due to run out from last month’s continuing resolution, or CR.
“Jordan voted against the CR a few weeks ago and has opposed most government spending bills in the past, so some people think he would be comfortable with a government shutdown next month. That view has some merit, however, as speaker, Jordan would be responsible for helping vulnerable House Republicans who represent competitive districts,” said Brian Gardner, Stifel’s chief Washington policy strategist, in a note.
“His new role could put Mr. Jordan in the position of having to make compromises with Democrats — new territory for him. The more likely outcome is that, if elected speaker, Jordan will support an extension of the CR.”
COMP
were advancing Tuesday, helped by encouraging earnings from big banks. Investors also are weighing rising geopolitical risks and better-than expected retail sales.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Rep. Jim Jordan made progress Monday in his push to become the next speaker of the House of Representatives, winning endorsements from some fellow Republicans who just last week had refused to back him.
The narrowly divided chamber of Congress is expected to vote around noon Eastern Tuesday to select a speaker, with the move coming after former Speaker Kevin McCarthy was ousted two weeks ago and after No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise ended his bid for the post last week.
GOP Rep. Ann Wagner of Missouri, who previously said a Jordan speakership was a non-starter for her, switched her stance on Monday. She said in a post on X that her colleague from Ohio “has allayed my concerns about keeping the government open with conservative funding, the need for strong border security, our need for consistent international support in times of war and unrest … as well as the need for stronger protections against the scourge of human trafficking and child exploitation.”
Similarly, GOP Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, announced in a post on X that he was backing Jordan after saying last week that there was nothing that Jordan could do to win his support. Rogers pointed to an accord on an annual Pentagon bill, the National Defense Authorization Act, saying he and Jordan had “agreed on the need for Congress to pass a strong NDAA, appropriations to fund our government’s vital functions, and other important legislation like the Farm Bill.”
Republican Rep. Vern Buchanan of Florida offered his support for Jordan as well on Monday, though he noted that he’s “deeply frustrated by the way this process has played out.” Another endorsement came from GOP Rep. Ken Calvert of California, who chairs the House Appropriations Committee’s defense subpanel.
Jordan — who has been endorsed by former President Donald Trump — sent a letter to his colleagues in which he called for coming together after a chaotic two weeks, saying: “It is time we unite to get back to work on behalf of the American people.” The congressman, a co-founder of the hardline House Freedom Caucus and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, also told CNN that he was confident about Tuesday’s vote, saying: “I feel good about it.”
Analysts have been warning that the process of finding a replacement for McCarthy is preventing the House from addressing crucial matters, such as avoiding a government shutdown next month and supporting Israel in its war against Hamas.
House Republicans made Jordan their nominee for speaker on Friday, but he drew just 124 votes while 81 lawmakers backed another candidate for speaker, GOP Rep. Austin Scott of Georgia. In another round of voting on Friday, Jordan still had 55 colleagues voting against him, but he now appears to be flipping some of them to his side.
One betting market, Smarkets, was giving Jordan a 33% chance of becoming speaker.
Having Jordan as speaker could mean a 1% cut in defense
ITA
and non-defense spending, noted Philip Wallach, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. That’s because this year’s debt-limit deal includes a provision that calls for such reductions if there aren’t bipartisan agreements on a dozen funding bills before Jan. 1 and instead a reliance on short-term measures known as continuing resolutions, or CRs.
“It is now clear,” Wallach said during an AEI event on Monday, that Jordan’s “plan is to have us live off continuing resolutions and implement this 1% cut.”
“That’s a concrete thing where he could say, ‘Well, we’re moving in the right direction. We’ve taken a hard stand,’” the AEI expert added.
The CEO of one financial advisory firm also sees standoffs in the future.
“We expect the next U.S. speaker will be less inclined to make deals than McCarthy; in many ways it makes more sense for them, politically, not to be a deal-maker in the current environment,” said deVere Group’s Nigel Green in a statement.
“We believe that a U.S. government shutdown is now more likely with a new speaker of the House, and this has the potential to create a domino effect in global financial markets
SPX.
”
BTIG analysts Isaac Boltansky and Isabel Bandoroff said the speaker drama suggests that next year’s election will also be full of twists and turns.
“We have followed every twist and turn of the speakership race, and there is only one takeaway we can share with absolute certainty: This confirms that the 2024 election cycle will be exhausting, volatile, and just downright weird from beginning to end,” they wrote in a note.
COMP
closed higher Monday, as investors looked ahead to earnings season and unwound the flight-to-safety trades seen last week on fears the Israel-Hamas war could escalate into a wider conflict.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Financial literacy peaks at age 54, according to a 2022 study. That’s around the time you’ve gained enough knowledge and experience to make sound money decisions — and before your cognitive ability might start to ebb.
“As we get older, we seem to rely more on past experience, rules of thumb, and intuitive knowledge about which products and strategies are better,” said Rafal Chomik, an economist in Australia who led the study.
If people in their mid-50s tend to make smart financial moves, where does that leave younger generations?
Advisers often educate clients at different stages of life to avoid money mistakes. While those in their 50s usually demonstrate optimal prudence in navigating investments and savings, advisers keep busy helping others — from twentysomethings to mid-career professionals — avoid costly financial blunders:
Perhaps the biggest blunder for young earners is spending too much and saving too little. They may also lack the long-term perspective that encourages long-range planning.
“The mistake is not establishing the saving habit early, and not appreciating the power of compounding” over time, said Mark Kravietz, a certified financial planner in Melville, N.Y.
Similarly, it’s common for young workers to delay enrolling in an employer-sponsored retirement plan. Not participating from the get-go comes with a steep long-term cost.
“ Better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run. ”
People in their 20s process incoming information quickly. But their high level of fluid intelligence can work against them. Cursory research into a consumer trend or hot sector of the stock market can spur them to make rash investments. Such impulsive moves might backfire.
“It’s important to resist the hype,” Kravietz said. “Don’t chase fads or try to make fast money” by timing the market.
Many young adults with student debt juggle multiple loans. Eager to chip away at their debt, they fall into the trap of choosing the wrong loan to tackle first, says Megan Kowalski, an adviser in Boca Raton, Fla.
Rather than pay off the highest-interest rate loan first (so-called avalanche debt), they mistakenly focus on the smallest loan (a.k.a. snowball debt). It’s better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run.
“ Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay. ”
By your 30s, insurance grows in importance. You want to protect what you have — now and in the future. But many people in this age group neglect their insurance needs. Or they misunderstand which coverages matter most.
“If you have a life partner and kids, get the proper life insurance while in your 30s,” Kravietz said.
It’s easy to get caught up in your career and assume you can put off life insurance. But even low odds of your untimely death doesn’t mean you can ignore the risk of leaving your loved ones without a cash cushion.
Another common blunder involves disability insurance. If your employer offers short-term disability insurance as an employee perk, you may think you’re all set.
However, the real risk is how you’d earn income if you suffer a serious and lasting illness or injury. Don’t confuse short-term disability insurance (which might cover you for as long as one year) with long-term disability coverage that pays benefits for many years.
Assuming you were wise enough to enroll in your employer-sponsored retirement plan from the outset, don’t slough off in your 30s. Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay.
“You want to give till it hurts,” Kravietz said. “Keep putting money away” in your 401(k) or other tax-advantaged plan until you feel a sting. Weigh the minor pain you feel now against the major relief of having a much bigger nest egg decades from now.
“ ‘The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life. Life is getting more complicated.’”
For Kravietz, the 40s represent a decade of heavy spending pressures. Mid-career professionals face a mortgage and mounting tuition bills for their children.
“The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life,” he said. “Life is getting more complicated.”
As a result, it’s easy to overlook seemingly minor financial matters like updating beneficiaries on your 401(k) plan or completing all the appropriate estate documents such as a will.
“People in their 40s sometimes fail to update beneficiaries,” Kravietz said. For example, a new marriage might mean changing the beneficiary from a prior partner or current parent to the new spouse.
It’s also easy to get complacent about your investments, especially if you’re the conservative type who favors a set-it-and-forget-it strategy. Instead, think in terms of tax optimization.
“In your 40s, you want to take advantage of what the government gives you,” Kravietz said. “If you have a lot of money in a bank money market account and you’re in a top tax bracket, shifting some of that money into municipal bonds can make sense” depending on your state of residence and other factors.
If you’re saving for a child’s college tuition using a 529 plan — and you have parents who also want to chip in — work together to strategize. Don’t make assumptions about how much (or how little) your parents might contribute to your kid’s education.
“Rather than assume you’ll have to pay a certain amount for educational expenses, coordinate between generations of parents and grandparents” on how much they intend to give, Kowalski said. “That way, you’re not duplicating efforts and you won’t put extra funds in a 529 plan.”
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Financial literacy peaks at age 54, according to a 2022 study. That’s around the time you’ve gained enough knowledge and experience to make sound money decisions — and before your cognitive ability might start to ebb.
“As we get older, we seem to rely more on past experience, rules of thumb, and intuitive knowledge about which products and strategies are better,” said Rafal Chomik, an economist in Australia who led the study.
If people in their mid-50s tend to make smart financial moves, where does that leave younger generations?
Advisers often educate clients at different stages of life to avoid money mistakes. While those in their 50s usually demonstrate optimal prudence in navigating investments and savings, advisers keep busy helping others — from twentysomethings to mid-career professionals — avoid costly financial blunders:
Perhaps the biggest blunder for young earners is spending too much and saving too little. They may also lack the long-term perspective that encourages long-range planning.
“The mistake is not establishing the saving habit early, and not appreciating the power of compounding” over time, said Mark Kravietz, a certified financial planner in Melville, N.Y.
Similarly, it’s common for young workers to delay enrolling in an employer-sponsored retirement plan. Not participating from the get-go comes with a steep long-term cost.
“ Better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run. ”
People in their 20s process incoming information quickly. But their high level of fluid intelligence can work against them. Cursory research into a consumer trend or hot sector of the stock market can spur them to make rash investments. Such impulsive moves might backfire.
“It’s important to resist the hype,” Kravietz said. “Don’t chase fads or try to make fast money” by timing the market.
Many young adults with student debt juggle multiple loans. Eager to chip away at their debt, they fall into the trap of choosing the wrong loan to tackle first, says Megan Kowalski, an adviser in Boca Raton, Fla.
Rather than pay off the highest-interest rate loan first (so-called avalanche debt), they mistakenly focus on the smallest loan (a.k.a. snowball debt). It’s better to prioritize debt with the highest interest rate, which can result in paying less interest over the long run.
“ Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay. ”
By your 30s, insurance grows in importance. You want to protect what you have — now and in the future. But many people in this age group neglect their insurance needs. Or they misunderstand which coverages matter most.
“If you have a life partner and kids, get the proper life insurance while in your 30s,” Kravietz said.
It’s easy to get caught up in your career and assume you can put off life insurance. But even low odds of your untimely death doesn’t mean you can ignore the risk of leaving your loved ones without a cash cushion.
Another common blunder involves disability insurance. If your employer offers short-term disability insurance as an employee perk, you may think you’re all set.
However, the real risk is how you’d earn income if you suffer a serious and lasting illness or injury. Don’t confuse short-term disability insurance (which might cover you for as long as one year) with long-term disability coverage that pays benefits for many years.
Assuming you were wise enough to enroll in your employer-sponsored retirement plan from the outset, don’t slough off in your 30s. Resist the temptation to lower your 401(k) contribution to boost your take-home pay.
“You want to give till it hurts,” Kravietz said. “Keep putting money away” in your 401(k) or other tax-advantaged plan until you feel a sting. Weigh the minor pain you feel now against the major relief of having a much bigger nest egg decades from now.
“ ‘The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life. Life is getting more complicated.’”
For Kravietz, the 40s represent a decade of heavy spending pressures. Mid-career professionals face a mortgage and mounting tuition bills for their children.
“The 40s are often the most expensive in anyone’s life,” he said. “Life is getting more complicated.”
As a result, it’s easy to overlook seemingly minor financial matters like updating beneficiaries on your 401(k) plan or completing all the appropriate estate documents such as a will.
“People in their 40s sometimes fail to update beneficiaries,” Kravietz said. For example, a new marriage might mean changing the beneficiary from a prior partner or current parent to the new spouse.
It’s also easy to get complacent about your investments, especially if you’re the conservative type who favors a set-it-and-forget-it strategy. Instead, think in terms of tax optimization.
“In your 40s, you want to take advantage of what the government gives you,” Kravietz said. “If you have a lot of money in a bank money market account and you’re in a top tax bracket, shifting some of that money into municipal bonds can make sense” depending on your state of residence and other factors.
If you’re saving for a child’s college tuition using a 529 plan — and you have parents who also want to chip in — work together to strategize. Don’t make assumptions about how much (or how little) your parents might contribute to your kid’s education.
“Rather than assume you’ll have to pay a certain amount for educational expenses, coordinate between generations of parents and grandparents” on how much they intend to give, Kowalski said. “That way, you’re not duplicating efforts and you won’t put extra funds in a 529 plan.”
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Rep. Jim Jordan won the nomination Friday to be speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives after launching a fresh bid for the position, as analysts warned that the process of finding a replacement for former Speaker Kevin McCarthy was preventing the Republican-run chamber from addressing crucial matters.
Jordan, an Ohio Republican who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, said “yup” on Friday morning when he was asked if he was running again for speaker after House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, a Louisiana Republican, ended his bid late Thursday.
House Republicans voted in favor of Jordan in the afternoon, with 124 supporting him and 81 backing another candidate for speaker, GOP Rep. Austin Scott of Georgia, according to multiple reports. Republican lawmakers then left for the weekend and were expected to reconvene Monday.
Getty Images
Scott, who has been in office since 2011, said in a post on X that he wanted to “lead a House that functions in the best interest of the American people.”
To become speaker of the GOP-led chamber, a candidate must earn the support of a majority of House Republicans. Jordan has crossed that hurdle but now must prevail in a vote on the House floor. Scalise bowed out of the running after it appeared he did not have sufficient support for a floor vote.
See: House speaker election — how it works
“[W]e need to be unified and get to the floor, and we want that to happen as soon as possible,” Jordan told Cleveland.com before the GOP vote on Friday.
Scalise’s decision to drop his bid “delays the resumption of meaningful legislative
business at least well into next week,” Benjamin Salisbury, director of research at Height Capital Markets, said in a note on Friday.
A similar warning came from Greg Valliere, chief U.S. policy strategist at AGF Investments. The House has had a temporary speaker — GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina — since Oct. 3, when McCarthy was ousted in a historic vote.
“This paralysis in the House is becoming a serious issue, as major legislation has stalled,” Valliere said in a note. “A government shutdown can’t be ruled out as the next deadline approaches on Nov. 17. More aid to Israel and Ukraine is widely supported in both parties and in both houses, but can this funding overcome procedural hurdles in the House?”
One betting market, Smarkets, was giving Jordan, a co-founder of the hard-line House Freedom Caucus, a 42% chance of becoming speaker. The Ohio congressman “faces difficult math,” as at least five Republican lawmakers are expected to vote against him on the House floor, and their ranks “may balloon by the time a floor vote is called,” Height’s Salisbury said.
Other options that have gotten attention include giving more power to McHenry, the temporary speaker, or making a bipartisan deal on a speaker.
COMP
closed mostly lower Friday, with the selling blamed in part on the Israel-Hamas war.
Now read: What U.S. political dysfunction means for the stock market and investors
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
The U.S. House of Representatives removed Rep. Kevin McCarthy from his post on Tuesday, as 216 members of his chamber voted in favor of ousting him while 210 supported him.
Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida led the challenge against his fellow Republican, filing what’s known as a “motion to vacate” late Monday, after McCarthy relied on House Democrats to pass a short-term measure that averted a partial government shutdown.
“I don’t think voting against Kevin McCarthy is chaos,” Gaetz said in a speech Tuesday on the House floor. “I think $33 trillion in debt is chaos. I think that facing a $2.2 trillion annual deficit is chaos. I think that not passing single-subject spending bills is chaos.”
The Florida congressman had said on Sunday that he expected Democrats were “going to bail out” McCarthy, meaning support him enough to offset the opposition from Gaetz and some other Republicans, but the vote didn’t play out that way.
Eight Republicans joined with all Democrats to vote against McCarthy. The eight were Andy Biggs of Arizona, Ken Buck of Colorado, Tim Burchett of Tennessee, Eli Crane of Arizona, Gaetz, Bob Good of Virginia, Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Matt Rosendale of Montana. There were a few lawmakers who were absent, such as Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, McCarthy’s predecessor.
See: Kevin McCarthy’s House speakership appears in peril with Democrats ‘not saving’ him
GOP Rep. Patrick McHenry of North Carolina is now serving as the speaker pro tempore, or temporary speaker.
Until now, no House speaker had ever been removed by a motion to vacate. The move requires a simple majority of the House to succeed and can be triggered by a single member.
Rep. Tom Emmer of Minnesota, who has been the No. 3 House Republican, was among the GOP lawmakers who spoke in favor of McCarthy.
“Under Speaker McCarthy’s leadership, our House Republican majority has actually defied all odds and over-performed expectations again and again and again,” Emmer said on the House floor.
There has been a view among analysts that a divided Washington’s spending might not change that much even if Gaetz managed to oust McCarthy, as MarketWatch reported.
About 80% of Congress looks likely to vote for a spending deal that would call for some increases in outlays, Ukraine aid, money for the U.S.-Mexico border and a new commission on the nation’s debt, said Chris Krueger, managing director at TD Cowen’s Washington Research Group, in a note. That agreement would come around when a new deadline of Nov. 17 hits.
U.S. stocks
SPX
COMP
could end up taking a hit from the House’s drama, according to Stifel’s chief Washington policy strategist, Brian Gardner.
“Removing Mr. McCarthy as Speaker could fuel temporary risk-off sentiment in the markets,” Gardner wrote in a note Tuesday. He suggested that markets “might react negatively to government dysfunction.”
Stocks closed sharply lower Tuesday, after a report on job openings showed the labor market remains tight, leaving room for more interest-rate hikes.
Read more: What McCarthy ouster means for markets as investors fret over congressional ‘dysfunction’
A motion to vacate last went to a House vote in 1910, with then-Speaker Joseph Cannon surviving it and staying on as the chamber’s leader. Such a motion was filed in July 2015 against then-Speaker John Boehner and not voted on by the House at that time, but Boehner went on to announce his resignation in September 2015.
In addition, a motion to vacate was considered in 1997 but ultimately not used by a small group of House Republicans who had grown disgruntled with the leadership of then-Speaker Newt Gingrich.
Now read: Kevin McCarthy ousted: Here’s who could replace him as House speaker
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
The U.S. stock market has been volatile in September. Brace yourself for October.
September has the reputation of being the worst month for the stock market, but October far and away is the most volatile month of the year — as you can see from the accompanying chart. So if this October follows the historical averages, the stock market won’t lose as much as it has so far in September but investors will still feel whipped around.
You might think October’s historical volatility can be traced to the U.S. market crashes that occurred in 1929 and 1987, each of which occurred during that month. But you’d be wrong: October remains at the top of the volatility rankings even if those two years are removed from the sample. Nor is there any trend over time in October’s place in those rankings: If we divide the period since the Dow Jones Industrial Average
DJIA
was created in 1896 into two periods, October is the most volatile in both the first and second halves.
Why would October be the most volatile month? I’m not aware of any plausible theory, and that normally would be a reason not to expect the historical pattern to continue. But not in this case.
That’s because an expectation of volatility can itself lead to greater volatility. So the fact that past Octobers have been so volatile is a reason to expect this coming October to also be a particularly choppy month on Wall Street.
If so, our job is not to get spooked by October’s volatility into going to cash. Of course, you may have other reasons why you might want to reduce your equity exposure. But if you were otherwise wanting to be heavily invested in equities, fasten your seat belt and hold on.
Mark Hulbert is a regular contributor to MarketWatch. His Hulbert Ratings tracks investment newsletters that pay a flat fee to be audited. He can be reached at mark@hulbertratings.com
Plus: Let’s debunk the bears’ top arguments against further stock market gains
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
“ The economic impact of a shutdown and the potential implications on your portfolio depend largely on how long the shutdown lasts. ”
The potential for a U.S. government shutdown can raise alarm for investors and send the phone of a financial adviser like me ringing off the hook. Headlines in front of them, my clients are increasingly asking about potential portfolio implications and how they should respond.
There is certainly a measured response, which includes not overreacting to the headlines and sticking to your long-term investment plan, and I’ll show you how to draw it.
First, it’s important to understand what is happening. During a shutdown, the federal government will suspend all services that are deemed nonessential until a funding agreement is reached. This is much different than a default — which can happen when the government can’t pay its debts or satisfy its obligations. A default can have significant ramifications on U.S. creditworthiness and in turn, the global financial system. You may recall lawmakers’ discussions earlier this year regarding raising the debt ceiling — a solution to avoid defaulting.
A U.S. default has never happened, but shutdowns have occurred more than 20 times since 1976. Unlike a default, a shutdown does not affect the government’s ability to pay its obligations, and many critical government services, like Social Security may continue. When weighing the two, one can presume that markets may react more negatively to a default.
Markets may experience heightened volatility in response to the shutdown uncertainty, but markets do not react consistently to the news. In the past we have seen U.S. stocks — as measured by the S&P 500
SPX
— finish positively after more than half of these shutdowns. Results are similar for fixed-income securities, as we’ve seen an even split between positive and negative returns in the bond markets in shutdowns since 1976.
Of course, all investing is subject to risk, past performance is not a guarantee for future returns, and the performance of an index is not an exact representation of any particular investment.
The economic impact of a shutdown — and the potential implications on your portfolio — depend largely on how long the shutdown lasts. The longer the shutdown, the more Americans experience dampened economic activity from things like loss of furloughed federal workers’ contribution to GDP, the delay in federal spending on goods and services, and the reduction in aggregate demand (which lowers private-sector activity).
Read: Government shutdown: Analysts warn of ‘perhaps a long one lasting into the winter’
A government shutdown is just one of many factors, both positive and negative, that can cause fluctuation in the market, so it’s important to treat it just as you would other fluctuations.
With so many variables, it’s impossible to precisely predict the effects the shutdown will have or determine how long it will last. This can seem scary for many, so it’s important to remember your long-term financial plan and focus on the factors you can control.
First, do not try to time the market. Doing so based on short-term events is never a good idea, and volatility is unpredictable. Even if the markets fall, we don’t know when they might recover. If you make an emotionally charged decision, you run the risk of missing out on potentially substantial market gains.
Instead, focus on the following: align your asset allocation with your risk tolerance; control your costs; adopt realistic expectations; hold a broadly diversified portfolio and stay disciplined. Doing so can help you weather any form of market uncertainty, including a shutdown.
In addition to not making any sudden moves in your investment portfolio, now is a suitable time to make sure you are keeping up with healthy financial habits, especially if you are a federal employee facing a furlough. This can look like readjusting your budget based on your current needs, keeping high-interest debt to a minimum, paying the minimum on all debt to keep your credit score in good standing and continuing to save.
Remember, using your emergency fund to navigate tight times is exactly what you have saved for and tapping it in this instance is considered a healthy financial habit. Just be sure to replenish it when you have the funds to do so. As a good practice, Vanguard recommends having three- to six months of expenses saved in readily accessible investments.
With a level, long-term approach and a personalized financial plan, you can be prepared for this potential storm and the inevitable ones to come.
Lauren Wybar is a senior financial adviser with Vanguard Personal Advisor.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Analysts at Citi on Thursday dialed down their expectations for Tesla Inc.’s third-quarter deliveries and profit, saying they based their new numbers on China sales, global registration data and an implied production pace for the EV maker.
Tesla
TSLA,
and General Motors Co.
GM,
are scheduled to report third-quarter vehicle sales next week, while Ford Motor Co.
F,
and a few others are slated to report September sales.
Earlier this week, a Deutsche Bank analyst warned that there was “meaningful downside risk” to current 2024 Tesla projections due to limited volume growth, and cut his price target on Tesla stock.
J.D. Power on Thursday estimated another double-digit gain for U.S. new-car sales in September. GM, Ford and Stellantis NV
STLA,
are facing a strike affecting some of its assembly plants and, in the case of GM and Stellantis, auto-parts distribution centers.
The Citi analysts, led by Itay Michaeli, said they trimmed their Tesla quarterly sales estimates to 450,000 vehicles, from a previous expectation of 468,500 vehicles.
See also: Tesla sued for racial discrimination, retaliation by EEOC
They lowered their forecast for adjusted per-share earnings to 75 cents in the quarter, from a prior estimate of an adjusted EPS of 81 cents for the quarter.
The Citi’s expectations compare with FactSet consensus of Tesla deliveries of 462,000 vehicles in the quarter, and consensus around an adjusted EPS of 79 cents for the quarter.
“We will revisit our model post the [third-quarter] delivery report,” the Citi analysts said. They kept the equivalent of a hold rating on the stock.
The update on the sales estimates was based on recent weekly China data “in part reflecting the Model 3 refresh transition,” as the compact sedan in some parts of the world is getting a minor update; the latest available global Tesla registration data; and their observations on production rate and “inventory discounting, with our estimates assuming some [quarter-on-quarter] de-stocking,” the analysts said.
Given Tesla’s production pace and the Model 3 changes, “we see a greater range of delivery outcomes vs. typical quarters,” they said.
Tesla shares have doubled so far this year, compared with gains of around 12% for the S&P 500 index
SPX.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Donald Trump’s chances of winning the 2024 presidential election appear to be improving this week, as betting markets tracked by RealClearPolitics put them just ahead of President Joe Biden’s for the first time this year — at 32%, compared with 30%.
That’s illustrated in the below chart, which also shows Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom of California with an 8% chance of getting elected president, even though he has ruled out a White House run repeatedly. Newsom’s chances are ahead of those for Trump’s rivals for the Republican nomination, such as Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley.
To be sure, betting markets got last year’s midterm elections wrong and can be poor predictors for several reasons. The clientele for political gambling tends to be right-leaning and male, and betting markets can get caught up in narratives as well as skewed by unreliable polls, one expert in political gambling and prediction markets told MarketWatch last year.
RealClearPolitics
Trump’s improved chances come as he skipped a GOP primary debate for a second time, instead giving a speech Wednesday night directed at Michigan auto workers in which he suggested that none of the debaters deserved to become his vice president.
The former president has 56.6% support in national primary polls, according to a RealClearPolitics moving average of surveys. He has been indicted this year in two separate election-interference cases, a hush-money case and a classified-documents case, but many Republican voters have rallied around him.
DeSantis is a distant second in those polls with 14.4% support, followed by Haley at 5.8%, entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy at 5.1% and former Trump VP Mike Pence at 4.2%. In aggregate, the non-Trump GOP candidates get 35.9% support in RCP’s average of national polls, compared with Trump’s 56.6%. In RCP’s average of surveys for Iowa, which holds the first major contest in the GOP primary, they get 46.4% support vs. his 49.2%.
Now read: DeSantis says at debate that Trump’s spending ‘set the stage for the inflation that we have now’
See also: Gas tax a target at Republican debate. Here’s what you’re paying now.
Plus: Instagram, other social media should be banned for anyone 16 and under, Ramaswamy says at GOP debate
[ad_2]