If youre interested in Asure Software, Inc. (NASDAQ:ASUR), then you might want to consider its beta (a measure of share price volatility) in order to understand how the stock could impact your portfolio. Modern finance theory considers volatility to be a measure of risk, and there are two main types of price volatility. The first type is company specific volatility. Investors use diversification across uncorrelated stocks to reduce this kind of price volatility across the portfolio. The other type, which cannot be diversified away, is the volatility of the entire market. Every stock in the market is exposed to this volatility, which is linked to the fact that stocks prices are correlated in an efficient market.

Some stocks mimic the volatility of the market quite closely, while others demonstrate muted, exagerrated or uncorrelated price movements. Beta is a widely used metric to measure a stocks exposure to market risk (volatility). Before we go on, its worth noting that Warren Buffett pointed out in his 2014 letter to shareholders that volatility is far from synonymous with risk. Having said that, beta can still be rather useful. The first thing to understand about beta is that the beta of the overall market is one. A stock with a beta below one is either less volatile than the market, or more volatile but not corellated with the overall market. In comparison a stock with a beta of over one tends to be move in a similar direction to the market in the long term, but with greater changes in price.

Check out our latest analysis for Asure Software

Given that it has a beta of 1.26, we can surmise that the Asure Software share price has been fairly sensitive to market volatility (over the last 5 years). If this beta value holds true in the future, Asure Software shares are likely to rise more than the market when the market is going up, but fall faster when the market is going down. Beta is worth considering, but its also important to consider whether Asure Software is growing earnings and revenue. You can take a look for yourself, below.

Asure Software is a rather small company. It has a market capitalisation of US$132m, which means it is probably under the radar of most investors. It has a relatively high beta, suggesting it is fairly actively traded for a company of its size. Because it takes less capital to move the share price of a small company like this, when a stock this size is actively traded it is quite often more sensitive to market volatility than similar large companies.

Since Asure Software tends to moves up when the market is going up, and down when its going down, potential investors may wish to reflect on the overall market, when considering the stock. This article aims to educate investors about beta values, but its well worth looking at important company-specific fundamentals such as Asure Softwares financial health and performance track record. I highly recommend you dive deeper by considering the following:

If you spot an error that warrants correction, please contact the editor at editorial-team@simplywallst.com. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. Simply Wall St has no position in the stocks mentioned.

We aim to bring you long-term focused research analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Thank you for reading.

Read more from the original source:
How Does Investing In Asure Software, Inc. (NASDAQ:ASUR) Impact The Volatility Of Your Portfolio? - Simply Wall St

Bitcoin had an amazing past decade by every definition of the word. The price of the cryptocurrency surged by literal millions of percent since its birth in 2009, some of the worlds most important people Elon Musk included(!) gave a nod to the cryptocurrency, and the broader industry began a mainstream technological trend.

Bitcoins clear outperformance against all other assets in existence has left many wondering if the cryptocurrency can keep its macro uptrend intact for the coming decade.

According to Raoul Pal a former Goldman Sachs executive who now is the CEO of finance media company Real Vision BTC may do just that.

He argued that the cryptocurrency would be his choice if he could only own one asset for the next 10 years.

On Friday, the Wall Streeter turned markets researcher and media magnate explained why the asset he is most optimistic about for the 2020s is Bitcoin.

In a to-the-point Twitter comment, Pal said that he thinks Bitcoin is the perfect asset for him to hold for the next decade because it encapsulates all of larger macro views, referencing previous statements he made suggesting the world will turn to an alternative system of finance that will be digital. (Previously, the Real Vision executive said that Bitcoin is basically an option on the future of finance.)

He added that from a pure risk-reward analysis perspective, Bitcoin beats all.

Indeed, per previous reports from NewsBTC, Pal told prominent BTC podcaster Stephan Livera that all popular asset classes are extremely expensive (meaning overvalued), save for BTC.

Equities, he explained, are roughly at all-time highs, and are pushing extreme valuations for relatively little profit and potential.

Bonds arent much better, Pal opines, drawing attention to the virtually zero yields andnegative yields in some cases that debt deemed safe provides.

Even real estate isnt attractive, with the prominent investor calling this asset class unaffordable, adding that it makes even less sense to purchase homes because theyre trading near all-time highs.

Hence, Bitcoin.

Others agree that the following decade for Bitcoin will be formative. More formative than the last.

Deutsche Bank in a report published in December said that it thinks that crypto assets have the potential to take over fiat currencies as a whole:

The forces that have held the currentfiatsystem together now look fragile and they could unravel in the 2020s. If so, that will start to lead to a backlash againstfiatmoney and demand for alternative currencies, such as gold or crypto could soar.

View post:
Bitcoin to Be One of the 2020s Top Investments: Ex-Goldman Sachs Exec Says Why - newsBTC

By: C. RANGARAJAN The Union Budget 2020-21 was looked forward to with great expectations. Growth rate for 2019-20 was estimated at 5%, the lowest in a decade. The fixed capital formation rate had fallen from 34.3% of GDP in 2011-12 to 27.8% in 2019-20, a steep decline of 6.5%, reducing the potential growth rate by1.6%.

The budget was expected to address these problems. Have these expectations been fulfilled?

Overall, the budget is well-intentioned, even though it does not use the word slowdown even once. It outlines, in extenso, the multiple objectives it seeks to achieve. While the expenditure programmes may show how demand will be revived, the revenue projections, along with the fiscal deficit, will indicate whether these expenditure programmes are sustainable.

While the fiscal deficit in the current fiscal goes up to 3.8%, the projected fiscal deficit for 2020-21 is 3.5%. While these levels are above the implicit mandate of 3% of GDP, they may be condoned, given the need to raise government expenditures to stimulate demand. However, the critical question is whether the 3.5% fiscal deficit will stick.

The nominal GDP in 2019-20 is assumed to grow by 10%. This is realistic. The gross tax revenue is assumed to grow by 12%. Thus, the buoyancy is greater than one that did not materialise in the current year. The reliance on disinvestment is high, even after allowing for LIC disinvestment.

The finance ministry will have to monitor the revenue growth so that expenditures must be adjusted such that the fiscal deficit can be maintained. In fact, taking the expenditures as given, the possibility of GoI exceeding the budgets fiscal deficit is very much there. The escape clause should be seen as permitting GoI to exceed by 0.5% the implicit mandate of 3%, rather than over and above what is budgeted.

It is hoped that GoI would not by invoking the escape clause and ask RBI to enter the primary market in government paper. That will tantamount to monetising directly the fiscal deficit.

Some of the changes in the tax regime are significant. A major effort was made some months ago to cut the corporation tax rate. In this budget, some steps have been taken in the direction of simplifying personal income tax (I-T). The impact of this may be very limited. In fact, the broad principle of reducing the tax rate along with withdrawing exemptions must be taken to the logical end and must cover the entire gamut of personal I-T. We should move towards a single regime rather than give options.

Bulk of the time was spent by the FM on explaining the various programmes in different sectors. Quite clearly, sectoral experts must examine how relevant these expenditures are. More importantly, much depends on how they are implemented. The overall expenditures show a rise of 12%. Within that, capital expenditures are expected to increase 18%. However, the ratio of capital expenditures to GDP stays at 1.8%, which is the average over the past few years.

The financial sector has come in for special treatment. Reforms are needed to strengthen the financial system and move it forward. As far as the banking system is concerned, the crucial question is not so much mergers as the extent of the total banking system, which the public sector wants to own. The action relating to the Industrial Development Bank of India gives us some idea. But more clarity is needed.

The second important reform measure is to determine the arms length between GoI and the board of management of public sector banks. Efficiency is a function not only of technology, but also the structure of the organisation.

It is a moot point if the proposed government expenditures will stimulate demand. The room available for GoI is limited. Also, expenditures lack focus. As for stimulating investment, GoIs own participation is still limited. In fact, in 2020-21, of the total fiscal deficit of 3.5%, revenue deficit is 2.7%. The driver of deficit is not investment. Much of the overall capital expenditure of GoI comes from extra-budgetary resources. Therefore, a lot depends on the pick-up in private investment. Will the budget help to create a favourable investment sentiment? We have to wait and see.

(The author is the former Governor of RBI)

Continue reading here:
View: Is this budgetary shrug really a nudge enough for private investment to pick up? - Economic Times

The FTSE 100 has experienced a volatile start to 2020. Its price level has been highly changeable in the first month of the year, with initial investor optimism giving way to concerns about the spread of coronavirus and its potential impact on the world economy.

While further uncertainty may be ahead in the near term, the FTSE 100 could offer long-term growth potential. As such, investing 1k, or any other amount, today over a period of 10 years could lead to sizeable returns.

Since its inception in 1984, of course, the FTSE 100 has experienced a significant amount of disruption, risks and periods of volatility. Despite this, it has risen from 1,000 points in January 1984 to trade at 7,500 points at the time of writing. This equates to a capital return of around 5.8% per annum.

When its dividends are added to that figure, it equates to a total annualised return of around 9%. Assuming a similar rate of growth in the next decade would mean a 1k investment today would be worth around 2,367 in 2030 assuming dividends are reinvested.

Of course, the FTSE 100s performance has been somewhat disappointing over the past 20 years. In fact, it reached a price level of 6,930 points at the very end of 1999. Since it trades only 8.2% higher than that level today, its annualised capital return since 1999 has been just 0.4%.

The main reasons for its disappointing returns over the past two decades have been a high valuation in 1999, as well as the impact of the global financial crisis. The index was significantly overvalued in 1999 as the tech bubble grew in size. And, just a few years following the bursting of the tech bubble, the index faced the largest recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

As such, in the past 20 years, it has failed to live up to its annual capital growth rate of 12.9% which was recorded in the 16 years from its inception at the start of 1984 until the end of 1999. In this sense, its performance has been akin to a game of two halves, where the indexs performance prior to the millennium was strong and its growth since then has been rather disappointing.

With the FTSE 100 having a dividend yield of 4.4% at present, it seems to offer good value for money. This suggests it could deliver an improving performance compared to that experienced over the past two decades. This may mean an investment today records a relatively high total return over the next decade.

As such, now could be a good time to buy a range of FTSE 100 stocks while they trade on low valuations. They may experience an uncertain near-term future, but history shows that they could improve your financial position in the long run.

The post If you invest 1k in the FTSE 100 today, this is how much it could be worth in 2030 appeared first on The Motley Fool UK.

More reading

Peter Stephens has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has no position in any of the shares mentioned. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.

Motley Fool UK 2020

Originally posted here:
If you invest 1k in the FTSE 100 today, this is how much it could be worth in 2030 - Yahoo Finance UK

In this final segment of this years Barrons Roundtable, our remaining five panelists share and defend 32 promising investments for 2020.

The investment pros spend more than half of their daylong meeting each January proposing stocks, bonds, and funds that they believe will race ahead of the crowd or fall on their faces, and this year was no different. Our other five participants picks appeared last week.

Weighing in below is Mario Gabelli of Gamco Investors.

Mario, lets hear about your 2020 picks. How many picks do you have?

Gabelli: Nine. First, Im back to baseball: Liberty Braves Group (ticker: BATRA). The stock is at $29.70, with 60 million shares and a $1.8 billion market value. The Atlanta Braves finished with a 97-65 record last season, so theyve done well on the field. Secondly, Major League Baseball is examining the minor-league ownership rules, which should increase the value of their A, AA, and AAA teams. The third point is betting, which is going to keep the eyeballs focused on the gamemeaning more advertising and money for the league.

In addition to that, theyve got SunTrust Park [renamed Truist Park], which is doing extremely well. John Malone controls the voting stock, except for the 18% our clients own. He will exit at some point. The one tiny challenge is that they dont have the rights to the television network because they licensed that off.

What could the stock be worth?

Gabelli: I wont sell for less than $42.

Whats your second-favorite sport?

Gabelli: Basketball: Madison Square Garden (MSG). It recently closed at $300 per share, with under 24 million shares and $1 billion in net cash. Theres some financial engineering going on. Instead of spinning off the sports teams, the New York Knicks, the Rangers, and some other assets are staying in a RemainCo, and theyre spinning off all their entertainment businesses via a SpinCo, hopefully this quarter.

Forbes values the Knicks at over $4 billion. And you just had Joe Tsai from Alibaba buy a piece of the Netsand he paid a fairly significant amount of money.

What about the spun-off entertainment businesses?

Gabelli: Live entertainment and live tours are very popular. Madison Square Garden is a leading live-entertainment venue operator. But Im not going to recommend the SpinCo because theyre building the Sphere [performance center] in Las Vegas, which is going to be more expensive than I expected. And theyre duplicating it in London. So I need to see the economics of that more clearly. But you want to buy the RemainCo, which is the sports teams.

On to No. 3, Mario.

Mario Gabelli: Im going to pivot to a defense company: Aerojet Rocketdyne Holdings (AJRD). They make liquid-fuel, solid-fuel, air-breathing, and electric-propulsion enginesthe things that make rockets and missiles go up. The Russians, the Chinese, and the U.S. are all developing hypersonic missiles, which will make our existing missile-defense systems look like the Maginot Line. The Pentagon will have a budget this year of $738 billion, up from $716 billion. And the U.S. just created the Space Force.

What are Aerojets numbers?

Gabelli: There are 90 million diluted shares at $48, roughly $500 million of net cash, and some undervalued real estate assets. Revenues are $1.9 billion, with earnings of about $1.75 per share. Theyre down, but thats because certain products were phased out. We think their results can inch up next year. Lockheed Martin (LMT) is their best customer, and thats where hypersonics fit in. But space-launch systems are part of Aerojets expertise, and the key driver there is companies like Blue Origin and SpaceX.

Lets get back to Earth for your next pick.

[Foxs] quarter that ended in December might not be vibrant, but then results should just roar ahead. With all these politicians running for office and gathering money and spending it, this is going to be a tsunami year for TV broadcasters.

Gabelli: The next one is Fox (FOX), at $36 per share [Fox and Barrons parent company, News Corp, have common ownership]. They sold their entertainment assets to Walt Disney (DIS) since we talked about them last year. I went to their first investor conference in May, where they said theyre not going to do anything major. But theyve already done four acquisitions and a half-billion dollars in share buybacks. For example, they bought a majority stake in Credible Labs, which is a financial-technology company. They bought a position in TSG in Canada because of FOX Bet [an online gambling operation]. Theyre also putting money into WWE ; thats wrestling. Live sports and news are part of their DNA.

The quarter that just ended in December might not be vibrant, but then results should just roar ahead. With all these politicians running for office and gathering money and spending it, this is going to be a tsunami year for TV broadcasters. Buy the voting stock [Class B shares]. Youre getting it at a discount to the nonvoting stock, plus you get the vote. They can earn $3.50 per share for the year ending in June 2021.

What about another recent media mergers-and-acquisitions story, ViacomCBS (VIACA)?

Gabelli: That one has been very painful for the past four years. They finally merged on Dec. 4. Again, youve got to buy the voting stock. National AmusementsShari Redstoneowns 42 million of the 52 million shares, which sell at a $3 to $4 premium to the nonvoting shares. The whole company has a $24 billion equity value. Thats a tiny morsel for Apple [AAPL] or Amazon.com (AMZN) in the hunt for content. Their studio, Paramount, has 3,600 movie titles, and they have 140,000 TV episodes in their content library. They have NFL football. They have [CEO] Bob Bakish. Meanwhile, theyre becoming an arms dealer to all of the Peacocks, Hulus, Disney+s, and Netflixes of the world. My dream wish on this one is that Sony Pictures merges with Paramount. Lets create a content juggernaut.

In calendar 2020, we see $6.5 billion of Ebitda. Also, they are selling CBS Manhattan headquartersBlack Rock. Over the next five years, theyre going to generate about $30 billion of Ebitda. Capital expenditure is de minimislike $200 million a year. The result is significant cash flow, so they can spend $14 billion on new content and bolster their Pluto TV and other streaming properties.

Read the picksand pansfrom these panelists

Scott Black: They generate free cash flow, but theres no growth, Mario. Its all financial engineering. I dont see it. The companys impaired; it has been for a long time.

Gabelli: The stock has clearly reflected that.

Black: I agree its undervalued. But its a value trap.

Well leave that up to the market. What are your last picks, Mario?

Gabelli: My theme for the 2020s is saving planet Earth. An idea linked to that is Connecticut-based Avangrid (AGR), which trades at $50. They have a regulated utility business, and their $10 billion rate base is growing. So, well have a tailwind to earnings and a rising dividend. The second part is the renewables business; theyre a major factor in solar and wind. Iberdrola (IBE.Spain), the Spanish utility], owns over 250 million of the 310 million shares outstanding.

My seventh pick, NextEra Energy Partners (NEP), at $52, also represents a significant opportunity in renewables.

Two to go.

Gabelli: The next one makes a product that even my wife likes. Its called Aperol. Aperol spritzes are the big thing now, made by Davide Campari-Milano (CPR.Italy). Theyre selling at about eight euros. Aperol is about 20% of their revenues, Campari is 18%. They also have Wild Turkey, which is what got me interested in the company years ago. And they have extraordinarily competent management.

Finally, Swedish Match (SWMA.Sweden), at around 500 kronor. Its best known for making snus [smokeless, moist powdered tobacco] and (ZYN) nicotine pouches. Its simple. Theyre selling ZYN in more and more locations in the U.S., and growing fast. The only short-term challenge is that the Swedish krona has come down sharply, relative to the dollar, which means their significant revenues in the U.S. benefit. If the krona gets a little stronger, they lose some of that.

Thanks, Mario.

Write to Leslie P. Norton at leslie.norton@barrons.com

See more here:
Mario Gabelli Says Its Time to Invest in Stocks That Will Save the World. These Two Stocks Fit the Bill. - Barron's

Kara Michelle Diamond and Andrew Nicholas Stahl were married Jan. 25 at the Brown Hotel in Louisville, Ky. Jeremy Crouthamel, a friend of the couple who became a Universal Life minister for the event, officiated.

The couple met at Columbia, from which they both received law degrees.

The bride, 34, is an investment funds associate in the New York office of Kirkland & Ellis, the Chicago law firm. She graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, from which she also received a masters degree in accounting.

She is a daughter of Sue Ann Diamond and Robert J. Diamond of Ponce Inlet, Fla. The brides father retired as a partner in Luckett & Farley, an architectural firm in Louisville. Her mother was a stay-at-home parent.

The groom, 31, is a litigation associate in the New York office of Sullivan & Cromwell. From August 2017 to August 2018, he served as a law clerk to Judge Jane R. Roth of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, with chambers in Philadelphia. He graduated from Georgetown.

He is the son of Marie D. Stahl and Gregory J. Stahl of Minoa, N.Y. The grooms mother is a pediatric nurse practitioner at a private pediatric practice in Cicero, N.Y. His father is a director of development for the College of Arts and Sciences at Georgetown University.

The couple met at a happy hour event that was part of an orientation at Columbia Law School in August 2012.

We talked for a couple of minutes, but I couldnt stay very long because I had tickets to a baseball game that night, Mr. Stahl said. But I had mentioned to a friend that I was definitely interested in Kara, and that there seemed to be a mutual attraction there.

Though they were in different sections of the law school and did not take any classes together, they occasionally heard about each other from mutual friends.

When Ms. Diamond happened to tell one of their more liberal friends that she liked Mr. Stahl and thought he was cute, the friend, who noted that Mr. Stahl dressed in a preppy and kind of conservative fashion, said hes in my section, and I think hes a Republican.

In March 2013, Ms. Diamond and Mr. Stahl reconnected at Columbias annual Public Interest Law Foundation gala. I saw him there and was really hoping he would come over, Ms. Diamond said. Even though we hadnt talked much since orientation, I thought he was so funny and smart and really nice, and I still liked him.

A few minutes later, Mr. Stahl was heading in her direction. We ended up talking for several hours and then went to an after-party together and talked some more, and by the next day, we were dating, he said.

They continued dating through law school graduation, and were established as a couple by the time they each began jobs at New York law firms in fall 2015.

In August 2016, Mr. Stahl temporarily moved to Philadelphia for the first of his two judicial clerkships (the first with Anita B. Brody, a District Court Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania). Ms. Diamond remained in New York, and they began a two-year, long-distance relationship between New York and Philadelphia that included spending numerous Friday evenings and early Monday mornings on the Acela.

It wasnt easy, thats for sure, and sometimes very frustrating, Ms. Diamond said. But the joy of just knowing we were going to see each other on all of those weekends really helped get us through.

Here is the original post:
Invested in Each Other, and the Acela - The New York Times

What percentage of your income goes into Uncle Sams pocket?

Your answer will vary depending on how much you earn. Data shows that low and middle-income families pay a much greater share of their income towards state and local taxes than wealthy families.

Todays visualization uses data from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) to map the effective tax ratesor taxes paid as a share of family incomeacross income groups at the state and local level.

The data reflects the effect of tax changes enacted through September 10, 2018, using 2015 income levels (the latest year for available, detailed income data). Both single and married tax filers are included, while elderly taxpayers, dependent filers, and those with negative incomes are excluded.

Taxes Included The report includes the state and local taxes for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Taxes are broken into 3 broad groups:

Federal taxes are not considered.

Editors note: Its worth noting that federal personal income tax has progressive rates, with the lowest earning bracket at 10% and the highest earning bracket at 37% in 2019. At a national level, property taxes are not charged and there is a very low reliance on excise taxesboth of which tend to be regressive as outlined below.

Income Included The report includes both taxable and tax-exempt income such as workers compensation benefits. It also includes estimates for the amount of unreported income.

Across the U.S., there is a wide disparity in how taxes affect different income groups. Heres how it all breaks down, ranked in order of tax system inequality:

Total State and Local Taxes As a Share of Income By State and Income Group

Washington has the most unequal tax burdens. Proportional to their income, Washington taxpayers in the bottom 20% pay almost 6x more than those in the top 1%.

At the other end of the scale, California has the most progressive tax system. As a share of their income, the states poorest families pay only 0.84x what the wealthiest families pay.

Overall, however, the vast majority of tax systems are regressive.

On average, the lowest 20% of income earners pay 1.54x more of their income in taxes compared to the top 1%.

Two main factors drive a tax systems (lack of) equality: how the state designs each tax, and the states reliance on different tax sources.

To better explain how this works, lets take a closer look at each type of tax.

These taxes apply only to spent income, and exempt saved income. Since families with a higher household income are able to save a much larger percentage of their income, and the poorest families can barely save at all, the tax is regressive by nature.

The particular types of items that are taxed affect fairness as well. Quite a few states include food in their sales tax base, and low-income families spend the majority of their income on groceries and other necessities.

Not only that, excise taxes are levied on a small subset of goods that typically have a practical per-person maximum. For example, one person can only use so much fuel. As a wealthy familys income increases, they generally do not continue to increase their spending on these goods.

States rely on these taxes more than any other tax source, which only exacerbates the problem.

For the average household, the home makes up the majority of their total wealthmeaning most of their wealth is taxed. However, the wealth composition of richer families skews much more heavily towards stock portfolios, business equity, and other assets, which are exempt from property taxes.

While these types of assets are subject to taxes like capital gains and dividends, the distinction is that these taxes are levied only on earned gains. In contrast, property taxes are owed simply as a result of owning the asset.

What about those who dont own homes? Landlords generally pass on the cost of property tax to renters in the form of higher rent. Since rent comprises a much higher share of expenses for poorer families, this makes property tax even more inequitable.

State income taxes are typically progressive. This means effective tax rates go up as income goes up. Heres how the U.S. averages break down:

However, certain policy choices can turn this on its head. Some states have a flat rate for all income levels, a lack of deductions and credits for low-income taxpayers, or tax loopholes that can be beneficial for wealthier income groups.

Nine states charge no income tax at all, garnering reputations as low tax statesbut this is true only for high-income families. In order to make up for the lost revenue, states rely more heavily on tax sources that disproportionately affect the lowest earners.

Evidently, states with personal income taxes have more equitable effective tax burdens.

Regressive state tax systems negatively impact the after-tax income of low and middle-income families. This means they have less to spend on daily expenses, or to save for the future.

Not only that, because wealthier families arent contributing a proportional share of tax dollars, state revenues grow more slowly.

For states looking to create a more equitable tax system, states with progressive systems offer some guidance:

By implementing such policies, governments may see more tax equalityand more tax dollars for programs and services.

Hat tip to reddit user prikhodkop, whose visualization introduced us to this data.

Thank you!

Given email address is already subscribed, thank you!

Please provide a valid email address.

Please complete the CAPTCHA.

Oops. Something went wrong. Please try again later.

Original post:
How to Unlock the Return Potential in Factor Investing - Visual Capitalist

On the surface, the growth story for exchange traded funds continues: The U.S. ETF business ended 2019 with $4.4 trillion in assets under management, a 30% increase from 2018, according to etf.com. The number of ETFs also increased 8%, to 2,302.

Thanks to the continuing growth of two hot trends environmental, social and governance, or ESG, and active management the growth will continue into 2020 and beyond, but not without challenges.

Here are five of the hottest topics at this year's Inside ETF conference:

1) ESG: It finally matters. 2019 was the first year investors stopped talking about environmental, social and governance investing and finally put some money into it. It's still small: ESG funds account for only $20.9 billion in ETF assets under management, or about 0.4% of the roughly $4.5 trillion the entire industry controls.

That will increase dramatically in 2020. Blackrock's Larry Fink wrote a passionate letter saying it was time to take climate change (and ESG) seriously, and it seems to have finally pushed the conversation over the top.

One problem: ESG is inherently un-scalable. "My ESG is not your ESG is not my neighbor's ESG," said Ben Johnson of Morningstar.

Even the Securities and Exchange Commission seems to agree: The agency has asked ESG providers for more information on how they define exactly what ESG is. One solution to the confusion may be direct indexing, which would allow individual investors to customize portfolios to meet whatever criteria they want.

2) More active management:Several mutual fund companies have applied for the right to convert existing actively managed funds into an ETF wrapper. Like their mutual fund counterparts, they will not disclose their holdings on a daily basis (hence "non-transparent"). The objections are obvious: if you are a crummy underperforming active mutual fund manager, you are not going to suddenly become successful if you switch to an ETF wrapper. You're still crummy.

Regardless, active managers still have followers, and if the better ones can switch to a lower cost, more tax efficient ETF wrapper, that will pull more money into the ETF space.

Expect American Century, T. Rowe Price and Legg Mason to be some of the first launches in 2020.

3) Thematic ETFs: What's the next pot craze? Everyone loves thematic investing, until they don't. Cannabis, cybersecurity, immunotherapy, blockchain, 5G, artificial intelligence, and even space exploration have been hot themes in the past. And then faded.

This tells us that the timing of these launches is critically important. Too early, and you could languish for a long time. Too late, and you miss meaningful asset growth over the early life of the fund.

Just don't count out the old favorites. "The cannabis industry isn't going away," Tom Lydon from ETFTrends.com said. "The cannabis ETFs and cannabis stocks are half-off what they were a year ago. As more states legalize marijuana and the Fed allows proper banking we'll see more assets flow to these ETFs."

And in the "hope never dies" category: Will 2020 finally be the year for SEC approval of a bitcoin ETF? My guess: don't bet on it.

4) Fee wars continue, but impact lessens:2019 saw a "race to zero" as the largest ETF providers cut fees to the bone. That will continue in 2020.

"It's no longer just about management fees falling to zero; it's now about EVERYTHING falling to zero," Matt Hougan from Bitwise Investments told me, noting that not only have trading commissions gone to zero, but advisor custody and platform fees have fallen. And you can get investment advice cheaper as well: Vanguard's Personal Advisor Services grew to over $100 billion, offers advice for pennies on the dollar, Hougan noted.

5) Consolidate or close? The race to zero fees is producing a few big winners and a lot of others left behind. There are 141 ETF providers, but the top five firms (Blackrock, Vanguard, State Street, Invesco, and Schwab) control 91% of the assets. Wisdom Tree (WETF), one of the few public pure-ETF plays, is 85% off its historic high in 2015 and is now near a 10-year low.

Consolidation has been expected for years, but buying up low-asset ETFs does not necessarily lead to scale efficiency: "There are fewer appealing dance partners by the day," Ben Johnson, Director of Global ETF Research at Morningstar said.

Regardless, someone is likely to take a shot at the consolidation game.

John Davi, founder and CIO of Astoria Portfolio Advisors, has an intriguing idea. "Private equity funds could enter and buy out 10 to 20 ETF issuers with the idea of monetizing the ETF ecosystem," he said.

He reasoned that there is already a ton of money flowing into private equity funds buying dental practices, plumbing businesses, and taxi medallions. Why not ETFs?

Read more:
Boom in exchange traded funds continues with socially responsible investing and active management - CNBC

A one-time $7,500 contribution at birth could potentially change everything for a future retiree.

Many Americans havent saved enough for retirement, and end up relying on Social Security to fund their old age. For some, Social Security makes up 90% of their retirement income. For others, it could be about 50%. This federal program, which doles out an average monthly benefit of about $1,500, was never meant to be the sole source of retirement income for older Americans. One recent proposal aims to change that.

As part of his work with the Stanford Center on Longevity, Ric Edelman, chairman and co-founder of Edelman Financial Engines, proposed a new vehicle to generate an additional source of retirement income. This account, just like Social Security, would be untouchable, Edelman said.

See: Everyone should be worried about Social Security and 401(k) plans including the presidential candidates

The program, called the T.R.U.S.T. Fund for America (short for Tomorrows Retirement for the U.S. Today), looks like this: when born, every baby receives $7,500 in an account managed by an independent agency of the federal government. The money is placed in a new type of EE Savings Bond, called the T.R.U.S.T. EE Bond, which would be issued by the Treasury Department. The total amount of bonds issued would be about $29 billion a year, assuming about 4 million babies are born, and would be self-funding, he said.

At age 70, the account would begin generating monthly income to be, on average, equivalent to Social Security benefits. The benefit is meant to supplement Social Security.

The money would last them until their 100th birthday, well past the 80-plus-year life expectancy for Americans.

If someone were to die before turning 100, the leftover funds in that account would be returned to the Treasury Department to be distributed to those who live to be older than 100.

Americans need as many sources of retirement income as they can get. The trust funds that support Social Security are expected to run out of money within the next 15 years, and if that happens, beneficiaries would only receive 80% of what theyre owed. At the same time, many Americans do not save enough for their futures sometimes because they cant afford to do so, and other times because they dont have access to efficient accounts. Even when workers do have a nest egg, they may have to tap those accounts for emergency situations, or other financial obligations, like paying down debt or buying a home. Private-sector pensions are increasingly rare, and more companies have shifted to a defined-contribution plans, like a 401(k).

Also see: The Secure Act is changing retirement here are the most important things to know

Having money stashed away for their entire lives, instead of just their careers, could make all the difference in a persons quality of life in retirement, Edelman said. The benefit of a program like his proposal would be utilizing compound interest to its fullest, he said.

Most Americans can only begin saving for retirement in their 20s and 30s, if theyre starting early, but by beginning their contributions at birth their eventual nest egg would increase exponentially. Someone saving $100 a month for 20 years would have contributed $24,000 in total, and have an account grow to $52,000 with a 7% rate of return. If that same person were to save $100 a month for 60 years with the same rate of return, shed eventually have an account balance of $1.1 million. The T.R.U.S.T. EE proposal would generate about $650,000 by age 66 with a one-time contribution at birth.

The government is trying to improve the countrys retirement system. The Secure Act was recently passed, which allows small businesses to band together to offer employees retirement accounts, as well as other provisions to expand retirement security. States are also getting involved by creating their own state-sponsored retirement plans for small businesses, which allows workers to automatically enroll and contribute to individual retirement accounts with their paychecks like one would a 401(k) plan.

Read the original here:
Want to solve the retirement crisis? Invest $7,500 for every baby born in America - MarketWatch

Income investors have choices.

Investing for income is an appealing concept for investors of all kinds. If you're focused on increasing your nest egg's size, then a reliable stream of cash is appealing because it removes some of the guesswork. And if you're at or near retirement, income-generating investments are a great way to have your portfolio pay you a little at a time instead of generating a big chunk of cash by selling off assets forever. Regardless of your age, strategy or portfolio value, income investing is an important area that should be at least a small part of how you allocate your money. Here are seven ways that have something to offer.

Bonds

One of the most common ways to invest for income is via the bond market. However, bonds are also one of the most varied and complicated asset classes. There are government bonds that involve loans to local municipalities, the U.S. federal government or even foreign governments. There are also corporate bonds that involve loans to enterprises of all shapes and sizes. And finally, the yield generated by a given bond varies based on the specifics, including the borrower's risk profile and the maturity of the bond. Properly researching individual bonds can be quite a task. As a result, most individual investors instead opt for bond funds.

Dividend stocks

Dividend stocks are generally riskier than bonds, since companies pay them out of their profits. As the financial crisis of 2008 demonstrated, even the most stable companies can have a crisis that dries up profits. Consider Citigroup (ticker: C), which slashed payouts from 54 cents a quarter in 2007 to a measly penny per share after the financial crisis. Still many are willing to take on this extra risk if it means they can enjoy the potential of a regular payday with the long-term hopes of seeing their initial investment grow alongside the rest of the stock market. Dividend stocks can be a win-win when they deliver capital appreciation and consistent income.

Preferred stock

Preferred stock is a kind of hybrid between stocks and bonds. It is less stable than bonds, since the stock value can fluctuate thanks to market forces. Preferred shares take a back seat to bondholders in the event of bankruptcy, but offer more stability than common shares. And income investors will be particularly interested in the fact that these assets tend to provide a significantly higher yield. As the name implies, preferred stock isn't just handed out to anyone. But several ETFs, such as the iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF (PFF), allow you to invest in this asset class with only a modest amount of cash.

Real estate

Another popular investment class for income investors is real estate. That includes buying a property in your hometown and renting it for income, as well as the arms-length strategy of investing in publicly traded real estate stocks. There's a special class of stock known as the real estate investment trust that grants favorable tax treatment to a corporation if it distributes nearly all of its net income to shareholders. This creates a leg up for firms that need a ton of capital to purchase and manage properties, but also for investors seeking income. Investors can buy individual REITs or put money in an ETF for ease and diversification.

Asset allocation funds

Can't decide how to build an income portfolio with some or all of these publicly traded investments? Then consider a one-stop investment fund that will build the portfolio for you. These include a variety of asset allocation ETFs, but also income-oriented mutual funds like the iconic Vanguard Wellesley Income Fund (VWINX) that has been providing a mixed portfolio for yield-hungry investors for more than 40 years. Right now the fund is about 40% stocks and 60% bonds, but it will pivot its mix and makeup depending on market conditions, so you don't have to.

Nontraditional sources

There are several nontraditional sources that can help supplement your income potential if you're willing to put in the time and energy to seek them out. Some living near shale oil fields may find they can earn a regular paycheck by selling mineral rights to the energy under their land. Others may participate in peer-to-peer lending, where you act as a banker to loan cash to someone starting a business or expanding their house. Those with means could consider a silent partnership in a local business. These nontraditional sources all require diligence, since they are not typical investments. But they can be a useful source of diversification and, in certain cases, bigger income potential.

Story continues

Interest-bearing accounts

Another income opportunity is the tried-and-true method of parking your cash at your bank or credit union to generate surefire monthly interest payments. With a guarantee by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. up to $250,000, these are perhaps the most certain income investments on the planet. The tradeoff for that safety comes in the lower yield. A one-year certificate of deposit account offers about 2% in potential income at current rates, which would amount to $5,000 annually on that FDIC-insured maximum of $250,000. Unless you have other sources of income or wealth, a CD alone likely won't grow your nest egg or provide the cash you need in retirement.

Ways to invest for income:

-- Bonds

-- Dividend stocks

-- Preferred stocks

-- Real estate

-- Asset allocation funds

-- Nontraditional sources

-- Interest-bearing accounts

More From US News & World Report

See the original post:
7 Ways to Invest for Income - Yahoo Finance