[ad_1]
Analyst Report: Stanley Black & Decker Inc
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Online sports betting and iGaming powerhouse Flutter Entertainment has published its Q3 results. While the company’s revenue experienced double-digit growth, its net loss broadened due to a variety of headwinds.
Flutter’s report for the three months ended September 30 outlined revenue of $3.8 billion, marking an increase of 17% year-on-year. The revenue in the US increased by 9%, with the International segment showing growth of 21%.
In addition to that, Flutter’s adjusted EBITDA increased by 6%, reaching $478 million. The adjusted EBITDA margin for the same period was 12.6%, the company reported.
These metrics reflected the acquisitions of Snai and Betnacional, as well as the strong performance of the company’s iGaming segment.
The company’s net loss, however, increased dramatically from $114 million in Q3 2024 to $789 million in Q3 2025. This reflected a loss per share of $3.91, up from $0.58 in the prior-year period. According to Flutter, the net loss reflects the non-cash impairment charge of $556 million triggered by India’s sudden U-turn in terms of gaming policy. The loss also reflects a $205 million payment to Boyd to revise US market access terms.
Despite that, the adjusted earnings per share painted a better picture, showing an increase of 29% to $1.64.
Flutter’s net cash from operating activities, meanwhile, decreased by 28% to $209 million, again due to the Boyd payment. The company’s free cash flow at the end of the quarter was down 78% year-on-year to $25 million.
Due to the impact of Q3 and the upcoming launch of FanDuel Predicts, Flutter has updated its 2025 outlook. The company now expects group revenue of $16.69 billion for the year, and adjusted EBITDA of $2.915 billion for the same period.
Flutter noted that these figures reflect reductions of $570 million and $380 million from the previous guidance, respectively. Despite that, the expected revenue and EBITDA still represent year-on-year growth of 19% and 24%, respectively.
Peter Jackson, Flutter’s chief executive officer, was pleased with the results, calling Q3 a solid quarter, despite the setbacks. He was especially thrilled about the upcoming launch of FanDuel Predicts and the recent international acquisitions, which will be key growth drivers.
We have a strong platform for executing our capital allocation strategy, with a continued focus on creating long-term shareholder value.
Peter Jackson, CEO, Flutter Entertainment
In the meantime, Flutter’s FanDuel brand just exited Nevada due to growing friction with state regulators about prediction markets’ legal status.
[ad_2]
Angel Hristov
Source link
[ad_1]
The Federal Reserve Bank of New York released its quarterly report this week, finding the total household debt in the United States increased by $197 billion, up to $18.59 trillion from the previous quarter.
A WalletHub analysis of TransUnion and Fed data found that average household debt increased by $275 to $975 from the second to the third quarter, depending on the state.
Household debt is the total amount of money that members of a household owe to lenders, which may include mortgages, credit cards, auto and student loans, and other credit lines. The number shows how much people are relying on credit versus their cash income.
Voters cited affordability and the economy as top concerns in the November 4 off-year elections. Democrats notched key wins in several high-profile races, with many voters citing the difficult economic landscape today. The economy has been a key pillar of President Donald Trump’s administration, particularly in the form of tariffs.
The New York Fed’s Center for Microeconomic Data found that mortgage balances grew by $137 billion, totaling $13.07 trillion at the end of September. Credit card balances grew at a slower rate, $24 billion, to a total of $1.23 trillion, while student loan balances rose by $15 billion, with a total of $1.65 trillion by the end of the quarter.
The report also noted that student loan delinquency rates are at 9.4 percent, compared to 7.8 percent in quarter one. It found that average delinquency rates remained elevated, reporting that 4.5 percent of outstanding debt in some stage of delinquency.
According to a WalletHub analysis of TransUnion and Federal Reserve data, Hawaii saw the largest average household debt increase, rising by $975 from the second to the third quarter.
California was a close second, experiencing a $880 average household debt increase, bringing the entire state’s total household debt to roughly $3.17 trillion. Colorado, Utah, and Washington shared similar average household debt increases, $832, $831, $824, respectively.
Looking into the fourth quarter, the government shutdown has delayed Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits payments to 42 million Americans, which may trigger many to turn to credit cards instead to cover their food necessities, creating an uptick of debt in the process, experts say.
Donghoon Lee, economic research adviser at the New York Fed said in a November press release: “Household debt balances are growing at a moderate pace, with delinquency rates stabilizing. The relatively low mortgage delinquency rates reflect the housing market’s resilience, driven by ample home equity and tight underwriting standards.”
Kevin Thompson, CEO of 9i Capital Group and host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek for a story earlier in November: “When EBT cards aren’t reloaded on time, people often turn to what little credit they have left, whether that’s maxing out a credit card, taking a quick cash loan with astronomical rate, or simply going without essentials altogether.”
Ofek Lavian, CEO of San Francisco-based Forage, which helps grocers serve the 42 million Americans who rely on EBT to feed their families, told Newsweek for a different November story: “Delays in food assistance will push low-income families toward credit card debt and other predatory options, as they face the impossible choice between feeding their families in November or suffering long-term financial consequences.”
The Kobeissi Letter, a weekly commentary on global finances and markets, wrote in a November 6 X post: “US household debt surged +$197 BILLION in Q3 2025, to a record $18.59 trillion…Americans are piling on debt at a rapid pace.”
The next quarterly household debt report is likely to reflect the government shutdown’s hit to consumer spending and borrowing. The over month long closure has left hundreds of thousands of employees missing paychecks and disrupting millions of benefits.
[ad_2]
[ad_1]
Bank of America is betting big on its wealth and investment management business, essentially leaning further into the top echelons of the upper class.
The banking giant (No. 17 on the Fortune 500) hosted its first investment day since 2011 on Nov. 5 in Boston. Executives set ambitious goals for the wealth unit: 4% to 5% net new asset growth in Merrill Wealth Management over the next three to five years, and revenue growth nearly twice the rate of expenses, with a target return on allocated capital rising to 30% for the entire segment.
“There is a huge opportunity in the U.S. wealth business,” CEO Brian Moynihan told reporters during a roundtable session on Wednesday. The U.S. boasts over 20 million millionaires, with about 6 million in China, he added.
The U.S. is on the cusp of “The Great Wealth Transfer”—an intergenerational shift expected to move $84 trillion to $124 trillion from Baby Boomers to heirs and charities by the mid-2040s, fundamentally reshaping financial services and families.
Bank of America and other big banks such as JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup are expanding wealth-management operations—competing to retain assets and attract new clients among Millennials, Gen Z, and ultra-high-net-worth families, especially those seeking values-based investing and advanced digital tools.
Bank of America claims a 14% market share of the ultra-high-net-worth segment. “Our national footprint covers 90% of the wealth opportunity,” Katy Knox, president of Bank of America Private Bank, said at the event. “We are aligning resources to capture it,” she said. Knox also noted that the bank invests heavily to grow its advisor base.
“Our model combines institutional power with a personal, local approach,” Lindsay Hans, co-president of Merrill Wealth Management, said. The combined advisor force numbers about 15,000. Recruitment is key to organic growth, she said, and it’s supported by the advisor development program that takes new hires from foundational skills to advanced roles.
“The training program is as big as most of the other firms in the business,” Moynihan told reporters. “It takes a lot of energy, talent, and ability to succeed.”
As banks aggressively compete for wealth advisors, Moynihan noted that advanced technology like AI, which is more attractive to young professionals, could boost talent acquisition at Bank of America.
Advisors spend much of their time on client development and relationship building, especially early in their careers, he explained. “They’ve got to build a book, and then grow that book,” he said, adding that AI can accelerate that process.
For example, Merrill’s Advisor Match program uses AI to connect clients with advisors most suited to their needs, analyzing preferences and advisor profiles to streamline referrals and improve matching accuracy.
Bank of America raised its medium-term target for return on tangible common equity (an indication of how effectively a bank is using its physical, “tangible” assets) to 16%–18% over the next three to five years, up from its previous guidance of “mid-teens.” It posted ROTCE (return on tangible common equity) growth of 15.4% in Q3, compared with JPMorgan’s 20%.
Christopher McGratty, an analyst at KBW, reiterated his outperform rating on Bank of America, noting that the bank’s new medium-term ROTCE target of 16% to 18% was in line with analysts’ expectations.
[ad_2]
Sheryl Estrada
Source link
[ad_1]
Costume lovers flooding Walmart’s aisles last month in preparation for Halloween had little idea how much calculation went into stocking this year’s superhero, witch, and zombie outfits. Amid the Trump administration’s fluctuating tariffs, Walmart’s seasonal planning, which begins months in advance, now includes projecting how levies might change before orders arrive, estimating potential price shifts and guessing how many units will sell, according to CEO Doug McMillon. All that comes on top of analyzing how inflation may affect consumer behavior.
“Families prioritize their children and their pets before they prioritize the parents, and a mom usually puts herself last,” McMillon said while speaking at the Harvard Business Review’s Future of Business event today (Nov. 3). “These trade-offs happen throughout the family.”
Walmart factored those dynamics into its Halloween strategy this year. “We were confident there would be trick or treating and children’s costumes would sell, but we might not sell as many adult costumes,” he said, adding that the company has “done a really good job of generally getting things right” amid the uncertainty caused by tariffs.
As America’s largest retailer, Walmart manufactures more than two-thirds of its products domestically. But it still depends on imports from countries such as China, Mexico, Canada and Vietnam, leaving it exposed to tariffs. Earlier this year, the Bentonville, Ark.-based company warned that the duties could force it to raise prices.
Price hikes are just one of several difficult choices Walmart executives face under tariff pressure. Other decisions include shifting production, changing countries of origin and managing inventory. Inventory management can be an especially delicate task, according to McMillon. “If you get over-inventoried, you end up with all these additional costs,” he said. “If you have too little goods, you end up missing sales opportunities.”
It’s not the first time Walmart has had to make quick decisions in response to an unprecedented event. The onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, for instance, accelerated the company’s decision-making as executives worked to protect employees and customers while maintaining supply chains. Those efforts paid off: Walmart’s profits surged in 2020 as consumers stocked up on essentials, spent stimulus checks, and embraced the retailer’s online shopping and curbside pickup options.
McMillion credits Walmart’s pandemic-era success to the agility of its associates across stores, supply chains and warehouses. “What I experienced is just how good their judgment was and how fast they could make decisions,” he said. The same adaptability, he added, is proving essential again as Walmart navigates tariff-fueled uncertainty.
“The way they’ve managed through this whole, ever-changing complex situation, too, has been impressive—just like it was during the pandemic,” he said.
[ad_2]
Alexandra Tremayne-Pengelly
Source link
[ad_1]
It was August 2023, and Matt Swain had five offers on the table for Triago, the company where he’d recently ascended to CEO. He’d built the mightily profitable franchise in an obscure corner of private equity called “directs”—essentially pairing solidly run businesses that wanted to sell, with family offices looking for outsize returns. Now, suitors comprising top banks from Spain and Korea, a leading U.S. private equity firm, a major Midwestern lender, and a giant Asian trading house were circling.
But as Swain weighed the offers, one stood out—from Bob Hotz, chairman of corporate finance and acquisitions chief at mid-market investment banking powerhouse Houlihan Lokey. He felt sure that Houlihan would provide the best home for himself and his team. So he was crushed when an email arrived: “We regrettably will withdraw from considering the purchase of Triago,” wrote Hotz, but noted that “you were the primary reason for our interest,” and graciously suggested they meet for a quick coffee at 9:20 the next morning.
Swain didn’t expect much. “I didn’t even wear socks with my loafers. I never wear socks at any casual, inconsequential meeting,” he recalls. “I just wanted to get veteran Bob’s advice on which offer to pick.” At breakfast, the hyperkinetic youngster quizzed the silver-coiffed, soft-spoken Hotz, who’s a half-century his senior. “Given the time limit, I was talking so fast I didn’t even touch my usual avocado toast. I asked Bob: ‘Which one is the right fit?’ And Bob does a total flip, and says, ‘I think we’re the best partner.’”
At 11 p.m. on Wednesday, Aug. 30, Hotz called Swain to declare he was in—but only on the condition that Swain leave his house full of guests on Nantucket and fly to London the Sunday of Labor Day weekend for a rapid-fire session of due diligence. Swain agreed and boarded the red-eye to Heathrow toting a bulging roller suitcase packed full of financials. By the following Friday, Houlihan Lokey had clinched the whirlwind purchase, reportedly for well over $100 million.
The marriage created a force to watch on Wall Street, between a whiz kid with a knack for dealmaking, and the giant mid-tier investment bank you’ve probably never heard of. In his early twenties, even before joining Triago, Swain beat the Wall Street pros in recognizing that the burgeoning wealth of family offices meant there was high interest in purchasing individual companies, rather than investing in “blind pools” of enterprises assembled by the private equity (PE) giants.
The founders of those family offices had often built and sold their own companies, and they and their heirs relished “kicking the tires,” instead of having a Carlyle or TPG decide for them. To satisfy that appetite among the super-wealthy, Swain developed a wide network of venturesome “independent sponsors,” operators that obtained letters of intent to purchase private, midsize businesses that did everything from making routine airplane parts to marketing Disney-branded souvenirs at a predetermined price.
That process where investors cherry-pick their own deals rather than, say, joining fund No. 7 of a PE colossus, is called “directs.” It’s existed for decades, but in his five years at Triago, Swain has proved the prime mover in taking the sector from backwater to big business, and became king of the realm. By Fortune’s estimates, drawn from industry data, the value of all direct deals, using the broad definition of single investments in private companies, will explode to something like $200 billion this year, multiple the number several years ago.
Still, “directs” have a way to go before they pose any sort of real threat to the PE giants. Though Swain has big plans, there has yet to be mass adoption by the traditional stalwarts of PE—the big pension funds, insurers, and endowments. Those huge institutions still overwhelmingly choose pools, where they can put tons of money to work quickly without specialized teams needed to parse these bespoke deals. Meanwhile success attracts competition—and Swain’s fat returns (garnered by buying and fixing cheap, overlooked, small and midsize companies) are attracting more and more competitors, a trend that could hike prices and reduce profits.
But no challenges seem to faze Swain, who has developed a vast Rolodex featuring the investment arms for the clans of late real estate magnate Sam Zell and ambassador to the U.K. Warren Stephens, plus the Romneys and Bloombergs, among a panoply of luminary names. He proved an expert at curating a cast of top sponsors and identifying the investments that promised—and a few years later delivered—big, PE-beating returns. “Pre-Matt, we had to find the independent sponsors, and it was difficult,” says Duran Curis, founding partner at Ocean Avenue Capital Partners, who manages a $2 billion portfolio of 140 directs. “His big contribution is that he finds them for us, and presents the best opportunities.” Now, paired with the muscle of Houlihan Lokey, Swain has big plans to start selling to pension funds, endowments, and asset managers.
Adds David Feierstein, cofounder of Ronin Equity Partners, an investment firm for which Swain’s raised several hundred million dollars to fund half a dozen purchases, “If you didn’t have someone as aggressive and charismatic as Matt, the directs industry wouldn’t be nearly where it is today. Matt had the first mover advantage. In directs, Matt runs the show.”
There’s something rare about Swain, who is a young brainiac, but one who has built his business the old-fashioned, pre-quant-trading and Excel models Wall Street way, via charm offensives that weave webs of tight relationships few rivals can match. It’s remarkable that this super-hustler comes from a highly privileged background. He grew up in Greenwich, Conn., son of the CFO of a prominent hedge fund. His ancestors were the original owners of Nantucket island. “Matt tells me his family had been coming to Nantucket for generations. So we’re walking to get coffee and we pass Swain Street, then Swain House, then we go to the Whaling Museum and get greeted by half a dozen portraits of his forbears,” says Rupert Edis, CEO of the Landon family office that includes Landon Capital Partners, a long-standing investor in Swain’s directs.
After graduating from Colgate University, where he served as student body president and starred in squash—he’s still one of the best amateur players in Manhattan—Swain joined Stifel, in a “placement agent” unit that raised money for hedge funds. The managers were amazed that family offices weren’t returning their calls, so they assigned Swain to find takers from a “dead list” of 1,000 mostly wealthy clans. The green recruit got mostly noes, upbraidings, and even a “You’re a midget!” from the respondents who didn’t hang up, but he also learned there was a gap in the market.
Swain played matchmaker. He found that independent sponsor IVEST needed funding for a plush toy purveyor called Dan Dee, and brought their leaders to Solamere, the family office representing the Romneys, former Walmart CEO Lee Scott, and other wealthy investors. Swain raised $100 million to notch the purchase. By 2018, he found a spot that was just small and daring enough to take a flier on his vision of building a whole business around directs: Triago, the firm founded by Frenchman Antoine Dréan that did a thriving trade in a close cousin, finding buyers for limited partners (LPs) that sought to sell their stakes in private equity pools.
Swain quickly turned directs into Triago’s profit driver. Over three years, he raised $3 billion in equity capital for 35 deals that, including debt, backed over $10 billion in purchases. In April 2022, Dréan named his 27-year old comer as CEO.
While Big PE typically delivers twofold returns to investors over a longer holding period, directs aim far higher. “Our investors are looking for returns of 3x or more,” says Patrick Zyla, managing director of Castle Harlan, a firm that Swain has worked with extensively.
Regular PE funds famously charge around 2% a year on all investors’ funds, whether or not they’ve been put to work yet. The directs sponsors typically don’t charge any fees at all, and even better, don’t get paid unless they deliver big-time. The industry’s giants usually get a fixed “carry” of 20% of profits when companies are sold. But directs deals are usually structured so that the sponsors garner zip until they hit a 2x bogey. Over that number, they start collecting 20%, but their take accelerates sharply with each multiple of their investors’ stake they return. If the sponsor-managers hit 5x, they can pocket as much as 40% of the gain.
“If you didn’t have someone as aggressive and charismatic as Matt, the directs industry wouldn’t be nearly where it is today.”David Feierstein, cofounder of Ronin Equity Partners
Sam Zell, who along with his team funded a number of Swain’s deals, absolutely loved this ultra-“skin in the game” aspect of directs. (Swain relates that Zell liked having his photo snapped alongside the youngster, as Swain was only slightly taller than the late bantam tycoon.) Zell and the president of the Zell family office EGI, Mark Sotir, would push Swain to arrange transactions that raised the bar for capturing a share of the profits, but gave the management teams an even bigger score for fabulous results.
That makes Houlihan Lokey’s pitch particularly appealing right now, given that PE has seen a sharp drop-off in exits: According to Hamilton Lane, a firm that invests on behalf of pension funds, as of 2021 PE firms were still holding 45% of their buyout deals five years following their purchase; last year, around 65% were still sitting unsold after a half-decade.
Meanwhile Swain’s model thrives on speed. With directs, the money comes fast, and so do the fees. It typically takes placement agents working on behalf of PE firms nine to 18 months to raise a full fund. But once the Swain gang gets a mandate from a sponsor, he and his bankers regularly make the rounds and secure the funding in eight to nine weeks. His team of 40 also concentrates on bigger and bigger deals that swell their take from the average directs transaction. This year, he expects to do around a dozen deals at an average enterprise value of $200 million to $400 million. “That’s much, much bigger than the average in the industry,” he avows. “We’re now working on one worth $2 billion, and the numbers will keep climbing.”
That expanded holding time, and LP thirst for liquidity, should especially benefit the first field where Swain and Houlihan Lokey envisage big expansion beyond traditional directs: so-called continuation vehicles, or CVs, where a fund tags an outstanding company promising great things, and doesn’t want to sell as it exits the other holdings. Today, Evercore is the biggest player, but Houlihan is rising. CVs cash out most of the existing LPs in that star “keeper” at a good return, and replace them with a fresh crop that sees big gains ahead by keeping and growing the standout for another, say, three or four years. The company spins off from the fund and continues as a stand-alone. The newcomers are once again going “direct” since they’re shopping on a deal-by-deal basis.
The second offshoot is what’s known as “co-investment.” PE firms increasingly seek to raise money beyond what the original investors contributed to a given fund. Say the managers see a software provider on the block at a bargain price, and want to add it to a tech portfolio. Or the “concentration limit” on any one purchase is $300 million, and they’d hate to miss out on a perfect fit at $450 million. Or the goal may be clinching a big add-on acquisition, or satisfying an unforeseen surge in sales by constructing new plants. In all those cases, the fund may lack the capital for seizing the opportunity. It may have $300 million still in its coffers and need a couple of hundred million more.
Swain and the Houlihan Lokey team view the area, still in its infancy, as a huge field for lucrative fundraising and investment-banking business. It’s a good deal for the fund LPs because they pay no fee or carry on the additional capital. The new investors pay carry at a rate that’s closely tied to performance: The percentage starts low and rises depending on the level of profit achieved. The arrangement empowers the co-investors to pick and choose their own individual deals, the great lure of directs in general.
Instead of coming from the small sponsors that Swain has mainly represented in the past, these opportunities are flowing from big, established PE outfits that have run these candidates for years, and can show impressive track records, both for the co-invest property and the firm’s overall performance. That imprimatur greatly heightens their appeal.
At Houlihan Lokey, Swain persists in the headlong roundelay of networking that’s his calling card. He does most of his business in a five-block radius of Midtown Manhattan. He resides in a Moorish-themed, Park Avenue high-rise, where he rents an apartment from Eric Trump; Ivanka Trump is his neighbor. Swain does his primary dealmaking at two nearby eateries, tony French venue Le Bilboquet and the LoewsRegency Bar & Grill. “I do back to back breakfasts at Loews, then a lunch at Bilboquet,” he avows. “Then in the evening it’s three chapters. First a cocktail at Bilboquet, then a real dinner, then an elongated catch-up over drinks. Before I hit 30, it would stop at midnight. Now that I’m 30, it’s over by 11:00 or midnight.” In the interests of efficiency, Swain changes tables when the new guest arrives, even if the old guest is still sitting there. Notes Tom Burchill, managing partner of PE firm Seven Point: “He bounces from one pole to another. Once, I got him for 45 minutes at Bilboquet. Lucky me.” When on Nantucket, Swain zooms around the island in a hard-bottom, Navy SEAL–style, super-high-speed raft, a type deployed by the military in Ukraine. He had it imported, and the money went to a manufacturer looking to support jobs in the beleaguered nation.
His business associates view him as both blithely charming and, in a word, obsessed. “Matt thinks a commercial thought every minute of every day,” observes Hotz, whom Swain reveres as “Uncle Bob.” Adds Mike DiPiano, managing general partner at tech PE firm NewSpring Capital: “He’s a young man selling at all times.” His ability to attract top older notables is remarkable. “He’s got this old soul for a young guy, and it’s infectious,” says Kevin Wilcox of the Stephens family office. Edis, of the Landon family office, praises Swain’s knack for “attracting powerful mentors and allies” and calls his ability to accomplish tasks in a jiffy as “Napoleonic”—at 5-foot-8, by the way, Swain is midsize, like the companies he markets.
Though Houlihan Lokey bought Triago 18 months ago, each side is already bringing the other big benefits. It’s astounding that the firm is so little known. Houlihan ranks as the world’s largest investment bank for midsize private companies. It’s also been the top performer on Wall Street for rewarding investors over the past decade, and by a lot. In that span, it’s delivered total shareholder returns of 26.4% a year, beating such fellow boutiques as Lazard (5.9%), Jefferies (13.2%), Moelis (17.2%), and Evercore (22%), while also waxing big guys Citigroup (9.3%), Bank of America (14.5%), Goldman Sachs (18.0%), Morgan Stanley (19.9%), and J.P. Morgan (20.3%). Back in the fall of 2015, Houlihan’s market cap trailed those of Jefferies, Lazard, and Evercore. Now at $13.6 billion, it’s bigger than all three.
A major plus in terms of the synergy at the newly combined company: the directs investment, fund investment, CVs, and co-investments originating from Houlihan Lokey’s PE clients. In 2023 Atlas Merchant Capital, a combined hedge and PE fund headed by former Barclays CEO Bob Diamond, worked with Houlihan as its advisor to MarshBerry, in a significant fund investment for that leading platform in the insurance brokerage space. Diamond is a Swain fan and was one of the Triago bidders. Now that Swain has joined Houlihan, Diamond is giving the firm business on both the fund investment and directs sides; he’s recently engaged the Swain team on securing follow-on capital for Atlas portfolio companies.
The CV connection is also spouting advisory fees for Houlihan Lokey. Last October, Swain raised the money for PE fund NewSpring, renowned for scoring big from buying Nutrisystem in the 2000s, for a vehicle that combined two of its star portfolio holdings. “You realize that if you could just hold these investments longer you’ll get much more out of them,” says cofounder DiPiano. Over sundry phone calls, Houlihan provided investment banking guidance to the family office investors, parsing the transactions’ pros and cons.
In co-invests, Riverside, a $14 billion PE firm that had been a Houlihan Lokey client for years but never worked with Triago, was seeking additional co-investment equity as a way to attract new limited partners and close on two fresh investments. Via the Houlihan connection, in stepped the Swain team. “We were introduced to dozens of LPs in short order, and secured investments from a number of them,” says Peggy Roberts, a managing partner at the firm. “Partnering with Houlihan has helped us forge sustained relationships with firms we would not have met otherwise.”
In the past nine months, Houlihan has raised over $500 million to secure three purchases for Swain’s stalwart customer Ronin. In June, the Swain contingent provided Ronin the funding to buy a company that repairs and overhauls systems for commercial aircraft. Houlihan conducted analysis on behalf of the family office investors. In April, Landon Capital Partners (LCP) scored a big hit via the sale of its portfolio holding, Wisconsin cheesemaker Heartisan Foods, where it partnered with Ronin on a deal in which Triago had raised the money. Through the Swain link, LCP has awarded Houlihan two mandates, one for a debt financing of a portfolio company, and another to explore a sale.
Early this year, the directs franchise collected $75 million in equity and debt for Seven Point to buy Frazier Aviation, producer of structural parts for military aircraft. Now, Seven Point is strongly considering Houlihan Lokey to provide the mark-to-market valuation analysis of its portfolio holdings to deliver to investors.
The rewards also go the other way. Liberty Hall, a PE sponsor focused exclusively on aerospace and defense, is a long-standing Houlihan Lokey client, and had hired Triago before the acquisition to lead a CV. The tie-up has further deepened its Houlihan relationship. Liberty Hall hired Houlihan to raise the capital for a classic direct that closed earlier this year. Between the CV and direct, Houlihan secured $250 million for Liberty. It’s also working with the Houlihan M&A group to seek new purchases.
Edis, chief of the Landon family office and a protégé of its founder, the late swashbuckling billionaire Timothy Landon, who’s legendary as the chief political advisor to his military school chum, the sultan of Oman, notes that Swain gives Houlihan Lokey an extra edge. “Matt’s been crucial in upselling Houlihan’s other services. As investments move through their life cycle, they need M&A, debt refinancing, and finding buyers for the final sale, and the natural thing for one of Matt’s companies is for Houlihan to take on that work,” says Edis. “We’re doing a new refi with Houlihan because of the cycle that began with Matt.”
In April 2025, the firm promoted Swain as co-head of its equity capital solutions group. The unit encompasses both the equity and debt fundraising franchises; according to sources on Wall Street the group generates $400 million to $500 million a year in revenue—that’s as much as a quarter of the $2.4 billion the firm posted in fiscal year 2025, ended in March.
Swain’s section is highly lucrative. From industry sources, Fortune estimates that at an annual run rate, the three directs areas combined—the traditional variety, CVs, and co-invests—are raising well over $5 billion a year. From studying this highly fragmented industry, Fortune concludes that Houlihan Lokey leads the field in combined classic directs and CVs; in directs alone, it holds a market share of around 10%.
For Swain, the rise of directs presages nothing less than a revolution in the world’s financial markets. “In the future, more and more institutional investors like pension funds and endowments will follow the family offices in buying individual companies, just as investors pick stocks. Instead of investing in a pool, they’ll invest directly into a company’s equity,” he declares. “In other words, directs will make the private market for companies much more liquid so that it looks like the public market for stocks.” Swain predicts that within a decade, the total size of the three classes of directs will be attracting the same annual volume of new funds as traditional PE commands today.
“In the future, directs will make the private market for companies much more liquid so that it looks like the public market for stocks.”Matt Swain
Already the Ventura County Employees’ Retirement Association is launching a program that will spend up to $20 million on directs co-investment this year, and the Texas Municipal Retirement System plans to dedicate as much as $15 billion over the next five years, adding extra growth capital to individual holdings in PE funds. “The large pension funds are migrating to smaller managers in the lower-middle-market and middle-market space because that’s where they’re seeing the highest returns,” says a leading investment advisor to the PE industry.
Swain’s PE customers praise his analytical skills in identifying the most promising deals. “He did intense due diligence on the Frazier Aviation deal, where we’re sponsor,” recalls Burchill of Seven Point. “When Matt goes in front of investors and says it will be good, they listen to him. His credibility helped give us our choice of investors.”
The golden child has developed his own highly original approach in trawling for profit—even on the streets of Manhattan, where you’ll never find him inside a taxi. “No matter how hot or cold it may be, Matt will say, ‘Let’s walk. It’s better for networking,’” marvels Hotz. One day in September, this writer joined Swain on one of his excursions down Park Avenue, and on cue, he ran into Jack Oliver, who heads the PE firm Finback, alongside former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. Two of the most outsize personas in private equity held their own little curbside summit, rapping on how they might connect on deals. I later asked the super-personable Oliver whether he or Swain is the more magnetic presence. Riposted Oliver: “I’d have to say I have the bigger personality. But he’s more successful.” One thing’s for sure, in a business that thrives on relationships, Swain will never stop working the room, the block, the island, the world, to bring deep-pocketed investors into his own corner of Wall Street.
[ad_2]
Shawn Tully
Source link
[ad_1]
The federal government shutdown has upended the lives of millions of Americans who rely on essential benefits disbursed by federal agencies. Principally among them is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which assists one in eight Americans who otherwise wouldn’t be able to put food on the table for themselves or their dependents. Now, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has confirmed that due to the shutdown, the well has “run dry,” and no benefits will be issued starting Nov. 1. As a result of Washington’s failure to reach an agreement on fiscal priorities, millions of SNAP recipients who typically receive food dollars on the first of the month at the reset of EBT payments will be left without assistance. And even more Americans will pay the price.
The lowest 20 percent of earners will feel the blow most acutely, as the loss of benefits devastates their ability to access nutritionally sound and affordable food options. When food access disappears, so does nutritional stability, triggering ripple effects across health, education and local communities. As families’ resources for healthy meals diminish, and as some go without food entirely, these changes have the potential to exacerbate food insecurity and deteriorate overall public health outcomes. Without swift intervention, the disruption could spiral into a national health crisis.
Few Americans grasp the magnitude of SNAP’s reach or the economic engine it fuels. Over 40 million people, who are integral to our national and local economies, workforces, and communities, rely on SNAP. Every dollar spent in SNAP generates roughly twice that amount in local economic activity. When those dollars vanish, corner stores, grocers, farmers’ markets and food distributors all feel the squeeze. Those losses flow upstream into job cuts, supply chain disruptions and reduced consumer spending, an economic domino that affects Americans across income brackets.
The health consequences are just as serious. When households can’t access food, preventable illnesses and chronic conditions often worsen. The result is a surge in emergency room visits, mental health crises and avoidable hospitalizations. Many Americans living below the poverty line already struggle to stay engaged with their physician, pharmacy and other healthcare providers, and without food, will have even less of a reason to prioritize things like medication adherence, chronic condition management or other self-care behaviors. This will not only lead to worsened health outcomes, but could also threaten to overrun hospitals and force ER staff to turn down patients in need. That strain will reverberate through an already overburdened healthcare system, exacerbating workforce shortages and driving up costs for everyone.
Public health experts estimate that inequities tied to food insecurity already contribute billions in avoidable medical spending and productivity losses each year. If the shutdown persists, those numbers will balloon. In a volatile economy where every sector is struggling to preserve stability, the loss of a cornerstone program like SNAP threatens to erode both pubic health and national productivity.
These Inequities also contribute to a broader economic drag: poor health outcomes significantly contribute to healthcare spending and lost Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which accounts for approximately 20 percent of the total cost of healthcare. Not only will this cost our healthcare system billions of dollars, but the crisis carries a human toll, costing individuals their dignity and many communities’ financial stability, as local grocers, farmers and other small businesses face collateral damage.


The pressure on low-income Americans is compounded by additional changes to SNAP and Medicaid set in motion by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), passed in July, well before the government shutdown even began. The legislation stipulates that able-bodied, childless adults between 18 and 64 must work, attend school or perform at least 80 hours of community service per month to receive Medicaid and SNAP benefits. Although many people meet these requirements through their equivalent activity, the new processes that are both lengthy and tedious will disqualify millions from receiving benefits, as they lack the resources to understand, navigate and ensure compliance. While intended to encourage workforce participation, the policy’s complexity and documentation requirements are creating new administrative barriers that disproportionately affect those without stable access to transportation, childcare or digital tools.
When the shutdown finally comes to an end, the OBBBA will keep millions in bureaucratic limbo, perpetuating problems for those seeking not only food-related benefits but healthcare more broadly, again impacting the most vulnerable Americans. This type of legislation, which threatens to strip impoverished groups of their access to food resources, stands in direct opposition to the stated goals of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, which calls for policies that make nutritious, unprocessed foods more accessible.
With the shutdown and the onset of OBBBA, SNAP will be in flux for many, forcing those with limited resources to stretch their dollars on cheaper, more processed and less nutritious foods, exactly the opposite of what MAHA aims to achieve. This disconnect, along with the administration’s failure to address the root causes, further underscores its inability to recognize the broader impact that neglecting this population has on all its constituents.
Ultimately, it’s up to healthcare professionals, business leaders and the private sector to mobilize and step in where the public sector is falling short. Partnerships between food producers, health systems and nonprofits can sustain emergency distribution programs, while employers and insurers can invest in nutrition-support initiatives that reduce downstream costs. Millions of people are being left behind by SNAP cuts, and their well-being depends on our collective response. Communities that have long relied on federal support are now at a breaking point. If we allow communities to fall through the cracks, the damage won’t be confined to any one ZIP code. It will manifest in slower growth, sicker populations and a weakened economy. To preserve the health, dignity, and stability of our society, we need bold, sustainable and financially viable solutions that close these gaps once and for all.
[ad_2]
Cindy Jordan
Source link
[ad_1]
Today’s investors have a lot of options for where to invest their money. Between private markets, cryptocurrencies, and other financial instruments, more traditional stocks may look a little old-fashioned.
“If you dial the clock back [to] two decades ago, if you had money and wanted to invest, you would call up your brokers and talk about what stocks there are available,” Bonnie Chan, CEO of Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing (HKEX), said Monday at the Fortune Global Forum in Riyadh.
“Now, people can get exposure to all sorts of investment opportunities. We’re entering a stage where exchanges are not really competing with one another, but working together.”
Since the first Bitcoin boom in the early 2010s, investors have increasingly explored new investment instruments, such as cryptocurrencies and other digital assets.
Meanwhile, stock markets are performing well this year, with indices reaching all-time highs, in part due to retail investors piling into buzzy companies and investment fads. On Monday, Chan’s fellow panelists, Saudi Tadawul Group CEO Eng. Khalid Abdullah Al Hussan and Nasdaq vice chairman Bob McCooey, noted that investor appetite was returning globally.
“The U.S. went through, from the end of 2021, two or three years of tough markets where people couldn’t get public. In 2025, we’re getting some momentum here,” McCooey said, referring to U.S. markets. He added that a growing number of companies want to go public (i.e. list shares for sale on the stock exchange), including private equity firms and government-backed companies.
Al Hussan also pointed to burgeoning investor appetite in Saudi Arabia’s market, noting that in the last three years, the country went from having eight to nine IPOs a year, to around 40 to 45 annually.
Chan, from HKEX, pointed out that Hong Kong’s exchanges have in recent times completed close to 80 IPOs. “We went through a phase in the last few years where there were questions as to the invest-ability of Chinese stocks. But I think we have made a lot of progress,” she said.
She attributed the global rise in IPOs to investors’ desire to diversify their investment and trading strategies, in order to hedge against market volatility from geopolitical uncertainty and new protectionist policies.
“They want to put their eggs in more than one basket,” she said, adding that Hong Kong has recently seen a return of international investors. “This year, we’ve seen a strong appetite from investors. They want AI, semiconductors, and names in the green technology space.”
Aside from tech, Chan noted a new investment trend, which she called “new consumption.” She cited the latest consumer craze for Labubu dolls, collectible plush toys designed by Hong Kong illustrator Kasing Lung. Pop Mart, which sells Labubu dolls in blind boxes, currently has a market value of over $40 billion.
[ad_2]
Angelica Ang
Source link
[ad_1]
Violich Capital Management Inc. lowered its position in shares of JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM) by 5.4% in the 2nd quarter, Holdings Channel.com reports. The fund owned 19,175 shares of the financial services provider’s stock after selling 1,085 shares during the quarter. JPMorgan Chase & Co. comprises approximately 0.8% of Violich Capital Management Inc.’s investment portfolio, making the stock its 28th largest position. Violich Capital Management Inc.’s holdings in JPMorgan Chase & Co. were worth $5,559,000 at the end of the most recent reporting period.
Several other institutional investors have also added to or reduced their stakes in JPM. Florida Financial Advisors LLC raised its position in JPMorgan Chase & Co. by 62.5% in the 1st quarter. Florida Financial Advisors LLC now owns 9,863 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $2,416,000 after buying an additional 3,792 shares during the last quarter. Crown Wealth Group LLC grew its stake in shares of JPMorgan Chase & Co. by 5.4% in the first quarter. Crown Wealth Group LLC now owns 4,320 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $1,060,000 after acquiring an additional 222 shares during the period. Mosaic Financial Group LLC grew its stake in shares of JPMorgan Chase & Co. by 0.8% in the first quarter. Mosaic Financial Group LLC now owns 9,296 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $2,280,000 after acquiring an additional 78 shares during the period. Morse Asset Management Inc grew its stake in shares of JPMorgan Chase & Co. by 19.5% in the first quarter. Morse Asset Management Inc now owns 2,569 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $630,000 after acquiring an additional 420 shares during the period. Finally, Hidden Cove Wealth Management LLC grew its stake in shares of JPMorgan Chase & Co. by 4.2% in the first quarter. Hidden Cove Wealth Management LLC now owns 2,758 shares of the financial services provider’s stock worth $677,000 after acquiring an additional 112 shares during the period. 71.55% of the stock is currently owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors.
NYSE:JPM opened at $305.29 on Wednesday. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.26, a current ratio of 0.86 and a quick ratio of 0.88. The firm has a market capitalization of $839.48 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 15.12, a price-to-earnings-growth ratio of 1.83 and a beta of 1.13. JPMorgan Chase & Co. has a one year low of $202.16 and a one year high of $318.01. The business has a fifty day moving average price of $303.98 and a 200-day moving average price of $282.92.
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM – Get Free Report) last released its quarterly earnings results on Tuesday, October 14th. The financial services provider reported $5.07 earnings per share (EPS) for the quarter, beating the consensus estimate of $4.83 by $0.24. JPMorgan Chase & Co. had a return on equity of 17.18% and a net margin of 20.90%.The business had revenue of $46.43 billion during the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $44.42 billion. During the same quarter in the previous year, the company posted $4.37 earnings per share. JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s revenue for the quarter was up 8.8% on a year-over-year basis. Sell-side analysts forecast that JPMorgan Chase & Co. will post 18.1 EPS for the current year.
The company also recently announced a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Friday, October 31st. Investors of record on Monday, October 6th will be issued a $1.50 dividend. The ex-dividend date of this dividend is Monday, October 6th. This represents a $6.00 annualized dividend and a yield of 2.0%. This is a positive change from JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s previous quarterly dividend of $1.40. JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s payout ratio is currently 29.72%.
Several equities research analysts recently issued reports on JPM shares. HSBC restated a “reduce” rating and issued a $259.00 target price on shares of JPMorgan Chase & Co. in a report on Tuesday, July 8th. Loop Capital set a $310.00 price target on JPMorgan Chase & Co. in a report on Thursday, October 23rd. TD Cowen upped their price objective on JPMorgan Chase & Co. from $350.00 to $370.00 and gave the company a “buy” rating in a research report on Friday, October 3rd. Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft upped their price objective on JPMorgan Chase & Co. from $300.00 to $320.00 and gave the company a “hold” rating in a research report on Tuesday, September 30th. Finally, UBS Group upped their price objective on JPMorgan Chase & Co. from $339.00 to $350.00 and gave the company a “buy” rating in a research report on Tuesday, October 7th. Two research analysts have rated the stock with a Strong Buy rating, fourteen have issued a Buy rating, nine have issued a Hold rating and three have given a Sell rating to the stock. According to data from MarketBeat.com, the stock has an average rating of “Moderate Buy” and a consensus target price of $322.27.
View Our Latest Research Report on JPM
In other JPMorgan Chase & Co. news, Director Linda Bammann sold 9,500 shares of the firm’s stock in a transaction that occurred on Tuesday, September 2nd. The shares were sold at an average price of $297.94, for a total transaction of $2,830,430.00. Following the sale, the director owned 82,207 shares in the company, valued at approximately $24,492,753.58. This trade represents a 10.36% decrease in their position. The transaction was disclosed in a legal filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission, which is accessible through the SEC website. Insiders own 0.47% of the company’s stock.
JPMorgan Chase & Co is a financial holding company, which engages in the provision of financial and investment banking services. It focuses on investment banking, financial services for consumers and small businesses, commercial banking, financial transaction processing, and asset management. It operates through the following segments: Consumer and Community Banking (CCB), Commercial and Investment Bank (CIB), Asset and Wealth Management (AWM), and Corporate.
Want to see what other hedge funds are holding JPM? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE:JPM – Free Report).
Receive News & Ratings for JPMorgan Chase & Co. Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for JPMorgan Chase & Co. and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.
[ad_2]
ABMN Staff
Source link
[ad_1]
If you’re a homeowner with substantial equity in your property but don’t want to take on more monthly payments or a traditional loan, a home equity agreement (HEA) may be worth considering.
An HEA lets you access cash from your home’s equity without debt or monthly payments, but you give up a share of future value. Typically, it’s best for homeowners needing cash without a loan, as opposed to a HELOC or a home equity loan, as they can be costly if your home significantly appreciates.
HEAs are growing in popularity, especially in markets with rising home prices. Whether you’re in Dallas, San Jose, or somewhere in between, this alternative could offer a flexible solution.
This Redfin real estate article will go over how a HEA works and how it compares to other ways to access home equity.
A home equity agreement or HEA – sometimes called a home equity sharing agreement, shared appreciation agreement, or home equity investment – allows you to unlock some of the value in your home without taking on a new loan or monthly payments.
Instead of borrowing money from a bank, an investor gives you a lump-sum cash payment today in exchange for a share of your home’s future value. You remain the homeowner and continue living in the property, but an investor places a lien or stake in your home’s future appreciation.
The agreement usually ends when you sell your home, refinance, or reach the end of a fixed term (often 10 to 30 years). At that time, you repay the investor based on your home’s market value at that point. Basically, an HEA lets you unlock cash today in exchange for giving up a portion of your home’s future gains.
Once you understand what a home equity agreement is, it’s helpful to see how the process actually works from start to finish. Here’s a look at how an HEA typically works:
Home valuation: The process starts with a professional appraisal or market analysis to determine your home’s current value and available equity. The investor uses this number to calculate how much cash you can receive.
You receive an upfront payment: A company or investor provides a lump-sum cash payment, usually 5% to 20% of your home’s value, based on your equity and the terms of the agreement. You can use the funds for home improvements, debt consolidation, or other major expenses.
You don’t make monthly payments: Unlike a home equity loan or HELOC, an HEA doesn’t require monthly payments or interest. You continue to own and live in your home while the investor waits for repayment at the end of the agreement.
Investor’s lien: To secure their stake, the investor places a lien on your property. You remain the full legal owner and are still responsible for property taxes, insurance, and maintenance. Because the investor’s lien remains on your property until repayment, it can affect future borrowing. If you decide to refinance or take out another home loan, you may need to pay off or restructure the HEA before doing so.
Term length: Most HEAs last between 10 to 30 years, or until you sell your home, refinance, or buy out the investor’s share.
Repayment: When the term ends, or if you sell or refinance earlier, you repay the investor the original amount plus their agreed-upon share of your home’s appreciated (or depreciated) value. If your home increases in value, they earn a portion of that gain; if it loses value, they share in the loss.
Fees and costs: While HEAs don’t include interest charges, they can have origination fees, appraisal costs, and closing or early termination fees, typically 3% to 5% of the amount you receive.
Let’s say your home is currently valued at $400,000. An HEA provider offers you $40,000 in exchange for 10% of your home’s future value. Ten years later, you sell your home for $500,000. The provider receives $50,000 (10% of $500,000), meaning you pay back more than you received, but you didn’t have to make payments for a decade.
A home equity agreement can be an appealing way to access cash without taking on debt, but like any financing option, it comes with both advantages and trade-offs. Here’s what to know before deciding whether it’s right for you.
An HEA can be a smart alternative to traditional borrowing, but it’s not right for everyone. Before moving forward, consider your financial goals, homeownership timeline, and comfort with sharing future equity.
You might consider an HEA if:
You might avoid an HEA if:
An HEA is typically best for homeowners who want quick access to cash and are comfortable giving up some future appreciation. It’s especially useful for those with shorter ownership timelines or limited borrowing options, while homeowners planning to stay put long-term – and expecting strong home value growth – may be better served by a traditional home equity loan or HELOC.
| HEA | HELOC | Home Equity Loan | |
| Cash access | Lump sum (one-time) | Borrow as needed | Lump sum (one-time) |
| Repayment | One-time payment when sold or term ends | Monthly payments + interest | Monthly payments + fixed interest |
| Monthly payments | None | Required | Required |
| Interest | No interest | Variable or fixed | Fixed |
| Equity impact | Gives up share of future home value | No equity given up | No equity given up |
| Risk | Owe more if home appreciates; possible minimum repayment if value falls | Foreclosure risk if payments missed | Foreclosure risk if payments missed |
| Best for | No-debt cash with no monthly payments | Flexible borrowing over time | Predictable repayment with fixed terms |
It depends on the homeowner’s financial goals. If you want debt-free cash with no monthly payments, an HEA may be a good fit. If you prefer flexible borrowing and ongoing access to funds, a HELOC is likely the better choice. If you need a lump sum and want predictable monthly payments with a fixed interest rate, a home equity loan might be the best option.
Each option has trade-offs. The best option depends on how much flexibility, risk, and repayment responsibility the homeowner is comfortable taking on.
Getting a home equity agreement involves a few key steps, similar to a home loan but with different approval criteria. Here’s how the process usually works:

It depends on the provider. Some HEA companies allow agreements on second homes and investment properties, while others require the home to be your primary residence. If you’re looking to access equity from a rental property or vacation home, check with individual providers to see if they offer this option.
If the homeowner passes away before the HEA term ends, the agreement typically transfers to their heirs. The heirs may need to sell the home, refinance, or buy out the investor’s share to settle the agreement. Some HEA providers may have specific clauses related to inheritance, so reviewing the contract is essential.
Many HEAs allow homeowners to buy out the investor’s share before selling, but this often comes with fees or a required holding period before a buyout is permitted. The buyout price is typically based on the home’s appraised value at the time of the buyout, meaning you could owe more than you originally received if the home has appreciated.
Yes, but there are restrictions. Some HEA providers allow homeowners to have a mortgage or HELOC alongside a HEA, while others prohibit additional liens or refinancing without approval. If you already have a mortgage, the HEA provider will often require you to have at least 25% to 30% equity in the home.
Most HEA agreements require homeowners to maintain the property to protect its value. This means you must keep up with repairs, insurance, and property taxes. Some agreements include clauses that allow the investor to inspect the home periodically or place restrictions on significant renovations.
HEA providers base their share on your home’s current appraised value and projected appreciation. The investor typically takes a larger percentage of future appreciation than the percentage of cash they provide upfront. For example, if they give you 10% of your home’s value in cash, they might claim 20% to 30% of future appreciation.
Some aspects of an HEA may be negotiable, such as the fees, percentage of appreciation given up, and early buyout options. However, many providers have standardized contracts, making negotiations difficult. It’s a good idea to compare multiple providers to find the most favorable terms.
If your home loses value, the investor may share in the loss, but this depends on the agreement. Some HEAs guarantee a minimum repayment amount, meaning you could still owe more than your home is worth. A market downturn could also make refinancing or selling the home more challenging, leaving you with limited options when the agreement term ends.
[ad_2]
Mekaila Oaks
Source link
[ad_1]
Allianz Asset Management GmbH reduced its position in shares of First Citizens BancShares, Inc. (NASDAQ:FCNCA – Free Report) by 49.0% in the 2nd quarter, according to the company in its most recent 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The institutional investor owned 265 shares of the bank’s stock after selling 255 shares during the period. Allianz Asset Management GmbH’s holdings in First Citizens BancShares were worth $518,000 at the end of the most recent quarter.
Several other large investors also recently bought and sold shares of FCNCA. SVB Wealth LLC purchased a new stake in shares of First Citizens BancShares in the first quarter valued at approximately $35,000. Wayfinding Financial LLC purchased a new stake in shares of First Citizens BancShares in the first quarter valued at approximately $64,000. Brooklyn Investment Group grew its position in shares of First Citizens BancShares by 32.1% in the first quarter. Brooklyn Investment Group now owns 37 shares of the bank’s stock valued at $67,000 after purchasing an additional 9 shares in the last quarter. Toth Financial Advisory Corp grew its position in shares of First Citizens BancShares by 32.5% in the second quarter. Toth Financial Advisory Corp now owns 53 shares of the bank’s stock valued at $104,000 after purchasing an additional 13 shares in the last quarter. Finally, State of Wyoming grew its position in shares of First Citizens BancShares by 15.8% in the first quarter. State of Wyoming now owns 66 shares of the bank’s stock valued at $122,000 after purchasing an additional 9 shares in the last quarter. 78.01% of the stock is currently owned by hedge funds and other institutional investors.
In related news, CEO Frank B. Holding, Jr. acquired 600 shares of the business’s stock in a transaction dated Thursday, August 7th. The shares were acquired at an average price of $1,698.75 per share, with a total value of $1,019,250.00. Following the completion of the transaction, the chief executive officer owned 32,300 shares of the company’s stock, valued at $54,869,625. The trade was a 1.89% increase in their ownership of the stock. The acquisition was disclosed in a legal filing with the SEC, which can be accessed through this hyperlink. Also, major shareholder Olivia Britton Holding acquired 409 shares of the business’s stock in a transaction dated Thursday, August 7th. The shares were bought at an average cost of $1,630.00 per share, for a total transaction of $666,670.00. Following the transaction, the insider directly owned 1,764 shares of the company’s stock, valued at approximately $2,875,320. This trade represents a 30.18% increase in their position. The disclosure for this purchase can be found here. Over the last 90 days, insiders have purchased 1,428 shares of company stock valued at $2,371,476. 13.40% of the stock is currently owned by company insiders.
NASDAQ:FCNCA opened at $1,786.10 on Tuesday. The company has a quick ratio of 1.04, a current ratio of 1.04 and a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.76. The stock’s fifty day moving average is $1,857.30 and its two-hundred day moving average is $1,884.71. First Citizens BancShares, Inc. has a 52 week low of $1,473.62 and a 52 week high of $2,412.93. The stock has a market capitalization of $23.08 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 10.56 and a beta of 0.60.
First Citizens BancShares (NASDAQ:FCNCA – Get Free Report) last released its quarterly earnings results on Thursday, October 23rd. The bank reported $44.62 EPS for the quarter, topping analysts’ consensus estimates of $41.51 by $3.11. First Citizens BancShares had a return on equity of 11.06% and a net margin of 15.99%.The company had revenue of $2.25 billion for the quarter, compared to analysts’ expectations of $2.21 billion. Research analysts anticipate that First Citizens BancShares, Inc. will post 167.59 EPS for the current year.
The company also recently declared a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Monday, December 15th. Shareholders of record on Friday, November 28th will be paid a dividend of $2.10 per share. This represents a $8.40 dividend on an annualized basis and a yield of 0.5%. This is a positive change from First Citizens BancShares’s previous quarterly dividend of $1.95. The ex-dividend date is Friday, November 28th. First Citizens BancShares’s payout ratio is currently 4.97%.
A number of research firms have recently issued reports on FCNCA. Keefe, Bruyette & Woods dropped their price target on First Citizens BancShares from $2,100.00 to $2,050.00 and set an “outperform” rating for the company in a research report on Friday. Raymond James Financial set a $2,100.00 price target on First Citizens BancShares in a research report on Tuesday, October 7th. Wall Street Zen cut First Citizens BancShares from a “hold” rating to a “sell” rating in a report on Sunday, September 28th. JPMorgan Chase & Co. upped their price objective on First Citizens BancShares from $2,100.00 to $2,250.00 and gave the company an “overweight” rating in a report on Tuesday, July 1st. Finally, Weiss Ratings cut First Citizens BancShares from a “buy (b-)” rating to a “hold (c+)” rating in a report on Saturday. Seven equities research analysts have rated the stock with a Buy rating and six have issued a Hold rating to the stock. According to data from MarketBeat, the company currently has a consensus rating of “Moderate Buy” and a consensus price target of $2,166.67.
Get Our Latest Analysis on First Citizens BancShares
First Citizens BancShares, Inc operates as the holding company for First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company that provides retail and commercial banking services to individuals, businesses, and professionals. The company’s deposit products include checking, savings, money market, and time deposit accounts.
Want to see what other hedge funds are holding FCNCA? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for First Citizens BancShares, Inc. (NASDAQ:FCNCA – Free Report).
Receive News & Ratings for First Citizens BancShares Daily – Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts’ ratings for First Citizens BancShares and related companies with MarketBeat.com’s FREE daily email newsletter.
[ad_2]
ABMN Staff
Source link