In all honesty, this is not necessarily a bad thing at all! But what’s important is to recognize that the landscape has completely changed.

Trying to emulate a path that doesn’t exist can be really tough. For previous generations, their idea of financial independence and their path to achieving it may look wildly different from what may work today.

Subscribe now

At the end of the day, living within your means, saving, and investing hold true. This is always sound advice. Every now and then, I’ll meet someone whose parents are heavily against something like investing or 401(k)s or anything outside of CDs and cash under the mattress.

This is where things can get dicey. The way your family handles money is likely ingrained in you to some extent. Of course, we want to be respectful of their opinions. They usually just want the best for us. However, we must be aware of the environment we are operating in.

Here are a few examples of what I mean when I say the landscape is different:

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) weren’t even around until 2003.

The very first ETF in the US didn’t make its debut until 1993.

If we look back just 15 years, you might have been paying $7 to $10 for every single trade you made.

Online high-yield savings accounts (HYSAs) didn’t really become a prominent part of the landscape until 2021.

Roth IRAs were not available until 1998.

Deferring Roth dollars to a 401(k) plan was not an option until 2006.

Some of the most impactful personal finance tools did not even exist as our parents and grandparents navigated their careers. They may be unaware that some of these vehicles even exist.

I’ll never forget my dad telling me the brokerage fees he used to pay to place a trade. Imagine paying $10 every single time you wanted to place a trade? On a $100 trade, that’s a 10% haircut!

Nonetheless, I’m not telling anyone to discount their family’s advice. Rather, be aware of the options that are currently available to you. While the principles may hold true, the tools have changed.

Advice from family can mean well, but it can neglect the differences in the environment we find ourselves in.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

Subscribe now

Number 1: Roth conversions

Whenever a low income year comes about, many begin to think about the potential for a Roth conversion.

In its simplest form, this is a tax-arbitrage opportunity. If someone were in the deferring to their 401(k) in the 37% tax bracket and were laid off, they may have a significantly lower income year.

The idea of converting some pre-tax funds in the 10%, 12%, 22%, or 24% bracket might begin to look attractive.

Here’s the nuance that is left out. Conversions are taxable and most platforms offer the ability to withhold for taxes via the pre-tax dollars themselves.

BUT if the individual is below the age of 59.5, this withholding is not seen as a conversion. It is seen as a pre-mature distribution.

Thus, it can be subject to the 10% early withdrawal penalty. Imagine converting $80,000, withholding $20,000 for taxes and getting slapped with a $2,000 early distribution penalty.

That’d be no fun. This is just the first example in which execution may look different than a conceptual overview of a topic.

Number 2: 72(t) distributions

I know I literally just covered these. I won’t even get too into the weeds here because I wrote an entire newsletter on this topic.

This is still somewhat of a hot topic in which I think a lot of context is left out. At face value, it seems awesome, and honestly, it actually can be for someone in a pinch.

But the mechanics are not nearly as simple as some make it seem. This is a high-touch and intricate distribution plan. IMO, the internet oversells the strategy.

Number 3: HSAs

HSAs are very interesting. They are arguably the most tax-efficient account around.

Yet, one must be on a high-deductible health plan in order to be eligible to contribute to one. This alone makes the account nuanced. If you want more, please check out my friend Ryan’s coverage on this topic. He does an incredible job of outlining it here.

High and recurring medical expenses may automatically rule out the HDHP, thus ruling out the HSA.

In practice, it is not uncommon to see younger professionals opt for the HDHP and as they build their families swap to a more comprehensive insurance plan. I have 3 brothers… One of us was either sick, hurt, or doing some type of physical therapy every other day.

Nonetheless, here’s another interesting nuance to the HSA. When the HSA is structured as a Section 125 Cafeteria plan, such as most are when it is offered through an employer, contributions via payroll can avoid FICA taxes.

Personally, my HSA allows me to contribute outside of payroll via my checking account. If I were to do that, I would not avoid FICA and the contributions would simply avoid federal and state taxes.

These are just 3 instances in which I’ve seen online information fail to cover the actual execution and implementation of a strategy.

I’m sure you all see stuff like this as well. Don’t make any knee jerk decisions based on something online. Not even this newsletter.

There is so much more to some of these strategies than social media leads on.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

I built this little visual to help everyone understand the nature of capital gains. For some, the “stacking” nature of these taxable events.

Essentially, capital gains are taxed at either 0%, 15%, or 20% federally. However, they are taxed at these rates according to taxable income, which capital gains are a part of.

Although they are taxed differently than ordinary earned income, they still count towards taxable income.

Subscribe now

So check this out:

For a single filer who had taxable income of $45,000 before their capital gains and they realized $25,000 in capital gains, they now have taxable income of $70,000 for this year.

The first $45,000 of taxable income will be taxed as ordinary income. The capital gains then play by the long-term capital gains rates.

One of the biggest misconceptions is that the 0% bracket for LTCG applies only to capital gains no matter taxable income. This is untrue. The 0% bracket applies to capital gains that fall within that bracket after taxable income is considered.

You’ll notice that similarly to more traditional income tax brackets, capital gains rates are progressive.

The scenario above does a solid job of showing how $4,450 attains the 0% bracket, while the remainder is pushed into the 15% LTCG bracket.

I won’t even lie to you all, just a few years ago this stuff still tripped me up. But it is incredibly important.

To throw a wrench into all of this, when income exceeds a certain threshold, an additional net investment income tax can apply. This additional tax complicates things slightly, but we’ll cover that another time! It is definitely something to be aware of!

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

Tons of people came right back with, “You must not understand Rule 72(t).” While this rebuttal is not wrong, they leave out major context. To me, it seems like they are saying that 72(t) distributions allow for the entire account to be “unlocked” and not subject to early withdrawal penalties. This isn’t the case.

So, I figured we would cover Section 72(t) or Substantially Equal Periodic Payments (SEPP) this week.

Subscribe now

72(t), at its core, is a way to access funds within an IRA or 401(k) (if separated from their employer) for individuals below the age of 59.5 without being subject to the 10% early distribution rules.

At face value, this seems like a great way for an early retiree to begin withdrawing from their retirement account in the event they needed to. Honestly, it can be a great way to access these funds! But first we have to discuss some of the mechanics of this election.

When 72(t) is elected, the owner of the account MUST take distributions annually for the longer of 5 years or until age 59.5. For someone who is 45, this can be a significant amount of time to be required to distribute funds.

There are 3 different methods in calculating the amount to be distributed. These calculations can be a tad in-depth. I will give a brief overview of each and leave a handy calculator below!

The amortization method*: This results in a fixed annual payment and is derived using a reasonable interest rate** and a life expectancy table.

*This method generally allows for the largest annual payment out of the three methods.

**The reasonable interest rate is either the greater of 5% or 120% of the AFR (applicable federal mid-term rate)

The annuitization method: This method also results in a fixed annual payment and is derived through a mortality table offered by the IRS and the interest rate explained above.

The RMD method: This results in a variable annual payment using the life expectancy factors associated with RMDs. This method can result in the most work as the amount needs to be recalculated annually.

Now, I’d like to present the calculator that helps us really visualize how much 72(t) can offer. Bankrate has an awesome one.

For our example, we’ll assume someone is 45, has $1,000,000 in their IRA, chooses the fixed amortization method, and uses an interest rate of 5%. Please note this is just an example and the calculator shouldn’t be solely relied upon if looking to elect into 72(t) distributions, working with qualified professionals is important.

This is where my gripe with the “You must not understand 72(t)” argument comes to the light. Someone who chooses the highest calculation method for 72(t) with a one million dollar balance can access less than 6% of the account’s value without penalty on an annual basis.

And they must do so for over 14 years. Could this be helpful to the right person? Definitely. Does this unlock a significant amount of funds relative to the total balance? Not really.

I’ll also add this, which most online seem to ignore: If any distributions are taken as a lesser amount than calculated or more is taken than the calculated amount, the 72(t) schedule is broken.

This can result in a retroactive 10% penalty on ALL previous distributions. Interest can apply as well.

I am not sure why this potential pitfall is not made more clear when people tout 72(t). Imagine at year 10 in our scenario, after ~$600,000 has been distributed, if the schedule was broken. This could result in the retroactive penalty amounting to ~$60,000 plus potential interest.

Oh… by the way, rolling funds into the account or making an annual contribution can potentially trigger this penalty as well… might be something people would want to know.

Now there are legitimate planning strategies around 72(t) distributions. Unlike for Roth conversions, there is no pro-rata rule and not all IRAs are subject to the rule. 72(t) can be elected for just one IRA of many.

One planning strategy revolves around looking to achieve the highest withdrawal amount from the lowest balance.

This can maintain liquidity outside of the account that is electing into 72(t). So, if a distribution was needed, it can be taken from a separate IRA and the penalty would only apply to that amount, rather than potentially breaking the 72(t) schedule from the initial account.

All of this to say, please double check your sources. Some of these planning topics that are discussed online are more in-depth than they’re made out to be.

While it may seem like I covered a decent bit on Section 72(t) today, there are even more factors that can impact a decision like this.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

Rather, I’d like to make the argument that life is like a loan.

It is something that is borrowed. From day one, we start crossing off days until suddenly, we don’t anymore.

Subscribe now

Throughout that time, we focus so much on money. It quietly drives many decisions we make throughout life.

Which car to drive, apartment to rent, restaurant to eat at. It goes on and on. Money is a constant throughout our borrowed time.

Yet we slowly lose track of life itself. We live for a weekend, book vacations to look forward to, and continue crossing off days.

So, if life is like a loan, that’d mean we might be able to pay it off early.

I came across a TikTok one day in which someone offered another person $10,000,000. Of course, it was hypothetical.

They followed the offer with one caveat. You’d receive $10,000,000 today, but there would be no tomorrow.

Almost everyone, and I’d bet 100% of my younger readers, wouldn’t put a present value on their future life experiences. There’s just no sum of money that’d be reasonable for someone to cut it short. I’d argue that $10,000,000 is a wildly significant amount of money to about 99.9999% of the globe, but who would take this deal?!

What resonated with me is that if our last day was worth more than $10,000,000, but we have no idea when that last day might be, shouldn’t every day be valued that way?

People have argued that the odds of you being born as you are 1 in 400 trillion. When it’s phrased like that, it becomes pretty obvious that we may be richer than we’d ever fathomed.

It’s something to think about, especially for younger professionals. I’m not here to discourage anyone from achieving their goals or fear-monger people into thinking they need to quit their jobs.

But I will definitely encourage people to find balance in their lives. Find things you enjoy and work you truly like if possible (I know this isn’t always the case.) Take time to enjoy life itself. Work is not life. Although, if you can find something you truly enjoy, work can feel a lot less like work.

It is so important to find balance financially, personally, and professionally.

Money can serve us, but at a certain point, if we aren’t purposeful in our financial lives, we become servants to our money.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

I have been quoting the joke someone made a lot as of late: “You can make someone $100,000 in the market and they’ll never love you as much as the person who saved them $10,000 in taxes.”

Of course, this is a joke. We’d all prefer the $100,000. Yet, it taps right into the psychology of paying taxes. Most people do not enjoy paying taxes and if there are any avenues to reducing a tax bill, they are usually interested in hearing it.

Subscribe now

Today’s topic may not seem too applicable to young professionals at face value, but with the anticipated wealth transfer from Boomer’s it is something to note.

The step-up in basis is such a powerful wealth transfer tailwind that some even refer to it as “The Angel of Death.”

Essentially, when taxable assets (real estate, brokerage accounts, most assets that are not held in a tax-advantaged account) are passed onto heirs after someone passes, the basis is stepped up to the fair market value on the date of their death.

There is no way in which my writing could express how significant this is.

Let’s review some of the basics before I show an example. Basis is the price an investor pays for their assets. Think of basis like an anchor. It dictates whether there is a capital gain or loss associated with an asset.

Now, let’s dive into an example of how this step-up in basis can be so powerful.

Assume that Person A bought shares of a company back in the day. They bought $100,000 of this company.

Fast-forward, and we’ll assume that this investment did incredibly well. It is now worth $1,000,000.

If they are to sell the position entirely, the gain of $900,000 could be subject to taxes. This could be a significant drag and quickly erase a great amount of the gain!

For a quick, back of the napkin tax assumption, if the gains were taxed at 20% along with NIIT of 3.8%, this could result in over $200,000 in taxes being owed.

However, if Person A passed this holding to their child, Person B, the basis is entirely reset.

Assuming Person A died and the fair market value was $1,000,000, Person B’s new basis is $1,000,000.

Meaning they can literally turn around and sell the position for $1,000,000 and be subject to no tax.

The step-up in basis is literally one of the most powerful tailwinds in generational transfers of wealth.

While it may not seem like it is applicable today, lots of financial planners are working with older clients to ensure this step-up is used to the fullest extent for the next generation.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

As if they believe they are deserving of a bear market… almost guilty for having been able to participate in a bull market.

As you all know, I cannot time markets. Nor do I try. But there has been no shortage of doomer takes as we entered 2026.

Subscribe now

Here, look for yourself. All you have to do is type in “dot com market” into Google and you’ll be met with a few of these search results.

Call me naive, but from what I have learned, the Dot-Com bubble was fueled by severe speculation. Companies that didn’t even really do anything could go parabolic at any point in time just by adding “.com” to their name.

Does that seem like today? To me, it does not.

I don’t think that any chart better explains my feelings than the one Phil Rosen posted to X. Phil is the co-founder of Opening Bell Daily. His work is impressive; I read it each morning and highly encourage those who are market-focused to check it out.

Phil’s chart shows the difference in valuation of key companies during the Dot-Com Era and the AI Era.

For reference, a P/E ratio, or price to earnings ratio, is generally used to value a company. While many factors go into analyzing a company, the P/E ratio is a quick way to understand the price of a company’s stock divided by its earnings per share.

At a very high level, the lower the P/E ratio, the more value an investor is getting per dollar paid for the stock. Please take this with a grain of salt. Security analysis goes much further than just one ratio.

But what the chart shows are absolute blowout trailing P/E ratios during the Dot-Com bubble. Microsoft was trading at 80x earnings! Said differently, for every $1 of earnings the company posted, investors were willing to pay $80.

Even the hyper-scalers of today, such as Nvidia, are only trading at 30x earnings.

One quick note: The figures shown for the Dot-Com Era are a trailing P/E ratio, meaning those earnings did materialize. For the current day ratios, a forward P/E ratio is used, meaning these are projected earnings and could be subject to change.

I’m not telling anyone which stocks I believe are undervalued or overvalued. All I’m saying is that Phil’s chart adds a ton of context to what a bubble might entail.

To me, it seems that there are fundamental drivers of this market, such as earnings expansion.

After reviewing it, it is hard for me to believe we are currently experiencing a Dot-Com era bubble. But that’s just me…

Do you think differently? Do you have evidence that contradicts my piece today? If so, please send it my way. I love to hear different opinions from readers.

One of my New Year’s Resolutions was to constantly challenge my existing beliefs! Help me make good on that resolution!

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

While the course focuses on taxes at the federal level, there have been some items that come up with nuanced state level differences. While the course doesn’t cover too much for specific states, it does highlight that it is possible, which usually leads me down a rabbit hole of finding new items to focus on.

Subscribe now

Some of these state level differences are actually really interesting and could potentially impact a decent amount of people!

Today, I wanted to outline just a few. Trust me, there are more than the 4 I am going to outline.

HSAs

You’ve probably seen someone say that HSAs are triple-tax advantaged. In most cases, they are! But certain states may play by different rules.

New Jersey and California do not conform to the federal guidance. In each of these states, the contributions are taxable at the state level.

To throw a massive administrative burden on HSA owners in these states, interest and dividends can be subject to state tax as well on an annual basis. While it is still federally tax-advantaged, the state level taxation can be tough to keep track of.

529 -> Roth Rollover

The Secure Act 2.0 gave 529 savers an amazing way to distribute funds to their beneficiary in the event they overfunded the education savings plan. 529 Plans are eligible to rollover up to $35,000 (lifetime limit, but subject to Roth contribution limit annually) to beneficiaries assuming the beneficiary has been named for over 15 years and has earned income.

This is an awesome generational planning tool. However, there are a slew of states that do not conform to the federal guidance here as well.

The rollover is permitted, but there may be a state tax recapture to the extent contributions were deducted.

Remember, some states offer a deduction for contributing to the 529 Plan. When the 529 to Roth rollover occurs, some states are looking to recapture that deduction.

My California friends… CA is arguably the least favorable state for a 529 to Roth rollover to occur. They recognize tax on the earnings and the rollover can even be subject the rollover to an additional 2.5% penalty for a non-qualified distribution.

Capital Losses

Generally speaking, capital losses can be carried forward indefinitely. Meaning that if someone does not take full advantage of them in the year they are recognized, they can be used the year after.

However, for our NJ and PA friends, that is not the case. These states do not recognize carry forward losses at the state level.

A huge planning item for people in these states! Especially for NJ as NJ state tax can range up to 10.75%!

As I continue my journey in this profession, it has become more clear to me that simply understanding these nuances and quirks can allow for so much opportunity. We don’t necessarily need to know which stock to pick or which sector is going to perform well, but understanding how to keep more of our hard earned dollars by way of tax knowledge can take a lot of guesswork out of the equation.

The takeaway here is to be aware of the potential differences at the state level. For some, these differences can make a significant difference in their financial lives!

Again, these are just a few examples of how state level taxation may differ from the federal rules. There are many more and some that carry significant weight, such as estate taxes!

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal, tax, or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

In fairness, we didn’t have assets then. We didn’t even really grasp the extent to which people were being financially burdened back then.

But this idea that our generation has yet to experience a meaningful drawdown in the market is absolute garbage.

Subscribe now

Please note that I do take it personally when older generations belittle our market experience. (Usually, it is because they are telling me personally that I haven’t experienced these things with an undertone of young advisors being unfit to do their job... First things first, if someone thinks our job is to focus only on markets, they don’t understand what we do).

So, let me make the argument that our generation has experienced significant market drawdowns.

First off, COVID. The COVID crash occurred when I was a junior in college. I worked throughout my entire college career. I had been investing since my freshman year. I remember this vividly. I remember exchanging texts with my dad about how quickly the market was moving.

The COVID sell-off was scary. Mainly because of how violent the sell-off was.

We hit 4 circuit breakers during the COVID sell-off in March of 2020. A circuit breaker kicks in when the S&P 500 falls 7% in one day. The market essentially shuts off for 15-minutes.

Do you know how many circuit breakers occurred during the GFC market crash? Try 0.

But hey, we don’t know anything about volatile markets and scary drawdowns… right? We only experienced one of the quickest 33% losses for the market in history.

We also experienced 2022. By definition this was a bear market and it was one of the worst years in the history of the bond market.

Throw in some flash sell-offs like the yen carry trade unwind of 2024, the DeepSeek event in early 2025, the Tariff Tantrum of April ‘25, and I’d make the argument that we’ve seen more than most give us credit for.

I’m sorry but I just don’t bite down on the idea that Gen Z hasn’t experienced a bear market. Have we not experienced a Dot-Com bubble bursting or a 2008 financial crisis, sure.

But those are exceptional events. They are not considered the norm.

One more idea. Gen Z invests heavily in cryptocurrency. They have been exposed to this asset class and seem to be adopters of the assets.

Crypto has experienced multiple 50% drawdowns over the last 8 years with 2022’s bear market bringing Bitcoin down over 70% from the high.

Gen Z lived this. They watched it. It was a very real drawdown.

While we might not have had the amount of assets at risk as older generations had during ‘08, we still experienced these drawdowns.

I hope there is never another 2008 event. But if there is, I’m confident in Gen Z’s ability to handle the drawdown.

We know more about investing than any other generation did at our ages and tons of information is at our disposal. We’re no strangers to market drawdowns and volatility and we have more market experience than most credit us.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

Some might even have this preconceived notion that I think picking stocks isn’t worth it or that I’d look down upon someone trying their luck and skill at stock picking. In all honesty, I have no issue with people picking individual stocks.

Investing can be fun, and people can build up some serious conviction in some of their favorite companies. Who am I to deprive them or steer them clear of that?

Subscribe now

Enter the opportunity portfolio.

The opportunity portfolio is what we label most portfolios that deviate from the standard portfolio. This could be a portfolio that is actively traded, options (usually not recommended), individual companies, or even cryptocurrency.

But here’s the catch. The opportunity portfolio is not one-size-fits-all. Usually, there are strict individual parameters around the opportunity portfolio, and we generally try to avoid them until lots of the fundamentals are taken care of.

If someone is:

• Contributing to a 401(k)

• Contributing to a Roth IRA

• Tracking well for retirement

• Building their “boring” asset base

They might just be a candidate for an opportunity portfolio! The opportunity portfolio is usually scratching an itch. People love to find conviction in stocks or even give some speculative trading a try.

Once an opportunity portfolio is brought up, we like to define the parameters. The most important parameter revolves around concentration. While it is always subjective, a general rule of thumb would be no more than 5% of investable assets.

At 5%, even if the account were blown to $0, we want to have a general feeling that this wouldn’t derail someone’s financial well-being. Remember, this will differ significantly between different situations.

So, as an example, if a younger professional with $200,000 in investable assets wanted to give stock picking a try with $10,000, that would likely not build too much risk into their financial life, yet it may allow them to scratch the itch of buying individual stocks.

Now, this is subjective. For someone with $10,000, would I consider a $500 trading account? Ehh, probably best to stick with the fundamentals at that point.

As investable asset bases grow, some are afforded the opportunity to add a bit of risk. The account is then monitored and can be tailored accordingly.

At the end of the day, it’s not uncommon to see people interested in alternative assets, trading, or picking some individual stocks. Rather than depriving someone of that, we like to outline the risks, contain the risks, and allow them to have the experience.

As with almost everything in personal finance, it is all about balance. Stock picking sounds pretty cool, but concentrating one’s retirement in just a few companies can increase their risk exposure significantly.

Encouraging people to learn more about investing while managing the risks associated can allow them to scratch that trading itch, learn, and further identify with their investments.

That’s something I’d never want someone to shy away from… as long as the risks are contained and properly managed.

While the initiative to pick individual stocks may seem like it’s about alpha, the opportunity portfolio is much more about behavioral containment.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

Some engage in short-term trading. I’m sure a lot of you who have been following this newsletter know this, but we’ll review for anyone new!

Subscribe now

Short-term capital gains are taxed according to ordinary income brackets. Very similar to how our wages are taxed.

Long-term capital gains are taxed under a more favorable structure: 0%, 15%, and 20%.

State and local taxes can apply to any income and capital gains can be taxed at these levels as well.

One last item: The Net Investment Income Tax. An additional tax of 3.8% that is applicable to single filers who have MAGI (modified adjusted gross incomes) over $200,000 can apply to investment income (interest, capital gains, etc).

Wow! That’s a lot of tax!

For our example, we will be using the 2025 brackets. While outdated, many are still in the process of filing and these brackets will still do the trick in driving home the point.

So, let’s assume our young high earner has taxable income of $300,000 before any capital gains. They did some trading and absolutely crushed it. They realized $100,000 in short-term capital gains. This brings their total taxable income to $400,000.

Here’s how that short-term capital gain would be taxed for our single filer:

Federal: 35%

Income between $256,526 - $626,350 is taxed at 35% at the federal level, meaning all of the capital gain would fall within this bracket.

State: 6.85%

Income between $215,401 - $1,077,550 is taxed at 6.85% in New York state.

Local: 3.876%

Taxable income above $50,001 is taxed at 3.876% in NYC

NIIT: 3.8%

Given MAGI will exceed $200,000 in our scenario, the short-term capital gain will be subject to another 3.8% net investment income tax.

Total: 49.526%

Again, this figure is for illustrative purposes. There are instances in which this figure could be reduced but for simplicity, this figure would be an approximation of the total tax on the short-term capital gain.

A whopping, almost ½, of the gain is forfeited via taxes. This is an astronomical amount of tax to pay for an amazing trade.

If the stock market dropped by 50%, we’d all be feeling it. We have not seen anything of the sort since 2008.

Well, our friend here just realized a 2008 event by way of taxes alone.

Pushing back on all of this, taxes are likely to be the biggest expenses of our entire lives. Purposefully planning and being aware of how these taxes can impact our situation is so incredibly important.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

I’ve seen and heard it many times, I’m sure you have as well. Someone saying, “Always max out this account” or “never do that with your money.”

The world of never and always creates a very tough mold to break out of. In some cases, people are over-optimizing and too much optimization can become a barrier to flexibility.

My absolute favorite part of personal finance is the idea of flexibility. It almost never has to be all or nothing.

So many aspects of personal finance are not binary and ensuring that you have reviewed all the options is so important.

Subscribe now

Here’s a few examples of what I mean:

Split funding goals:

I love split funding. It feels like we’re accomplishing two things at once. One of the most common split funding scenarios we see is putting a cash reserve in place and increasing retirement contributions.

Depending on the household, they may want to hold 9-months’ expenses as cash. But when they hit 3-months’ worth, they may also want to be saving for retirement.

In this scenario, once the 3-month reserve is met, it may make sense to begin adding some retirement savings to the stack.

Some Roth, some pre-tax:

Tons of people get tied up with how to contribute to their 401(k) plan. Generally speaking, in the higher tax brackets, individuals tend to favor the pre-tax and when in lower brackets, they tend to favor Roth.

For those who are in the middle-ground in the tax bracket hierarchy, a split decision may take the cake. It allows for a diversified pool of retirement funds, which is usually not a bad thing!

And for those who are doing Roth contributions, it is very likely that any employer match is ending up on the pre-tax side! Great diversification right off the bat!

Funding multiple accounts:

Some get really caught up in this. There is no rule that says a Roth IRA needs to be maxed out before a brokerage account is opened. There is no rule that says a 401(k) must be maxed out before a Roth IRA is opened up.

In a perfect world, I think more often than not, young professionals gain so much from having the full stack.

Of course, it may be tougher in the beginning to hit the maximum to a 401(k) and Roth IRA while still having funds to invest in a brokerage account.

But getting diversified tax-location can be so huge. Young professionals have some major purchases coming up! That brokerage account can add significant flexibility to their asset base with absolutely no age restrictions on withdrawals.

Selling a portion of a position

It happens! People can get very attached to their holdings. This is so prevalent when equity compensation is in the picture.

But here’s the thing… it is never all or nothing with this. There is always the ability to take some off the table. Could be 10% of the position, could be 90% of the position.

We have options and these options can allow us to feel more confident in the choices we make.

I know many would hate to sell a position only to watch it gain some serious momentum and at the same time, this one position may be making up a significant portion of their net worth. Concentration like that can become a real risk.

Finding a happy medium can help to mitigate that FOMO feeling as well as the potential concentration risk.

Alright, there are 4 very common scenarios in which I believe we need to be wary of absolutes. It seems silly to write out, but remembering that optionality exists is key. Work through different scenarios: Does it really have to be all or nothing? Am I diversified across tax locations?

Most people have more than one goal in life. Personal finance works the same way.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

Before we begin, let’s define a deduction. A deduction is something that lowers income subject to taxes.

For a quick, high-level example, if someone is in the 22% marginal bracket and they take a deduction of $1,000, they could expect tax savings of ~$220.

Subscribe now

At face value, the auto loan interest deduction does seem great. This could potentially help more people afford their car payments, right?

Well… about that. Like I said, at face value, it seems a little better than it really is.

There are some stringent requirements to qualify for this loan and there are even income phaseouts to take into consideration.

This deduction can be up to $10,000 annually but here are the requirements:

1. The vehicle MUST be new

2. The vehicle MUST have been finally assembled in the United States

3. MAGI (modified adjusted gross income) must be below $100,000 for single filers to take the full deduction and below $200,000 for MFJ. The deduction is fully phased out when single filers breach MAGI of $150,000 and $250,000 for MFJ.

So, up to $10,000 as a deduction sounds solid. But… we can’t forget that we’d have to have paid a full $10,000 in interest alone to get this full deduction!

Without really taking a second look, which is what makes me very apprehensive about this deduction, it can be hard to fully grasp what would need to be borrowed to pay $10,000 in interest in the first year of a car loan’s life.

To emphasize the amount of the loan, let’s reverse engineer and solve for the present value of a loan that would result in $10,000 of interest being paid in the first year.

We will assume the term is 60-months with a rate of 7%.

~$155,000

Yes, one-hundred and fifty five thousand United States Dollars would need to be borrowed to deduct the maximum amount of interest in year one.

Check out the following from bankrate if you are skeptical.

So, while a deduction might be nice, now we can kind of see the extent to which someone who is earning ~$100,000 must borrow in order to take the full deduction in year one.

They’d need to borrow roughly 1.5x their annual income for an asset that depreciates the second it is driven off the lot.

Sorry, if I sound like a pessimist, but to me this is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. We know what predatory lending is, but has anyone coined predatory deductions yet?

To bring this back to earth, here’s a slightly more realistic example.

Let’s assume a new car costs $50,000. We’ll put down 20% and finance the remainder at 7% over 60-months.

This would result in ~$2,580 in total interest being paid over the course of year one. Remember, it is not the entire payment that is deductible, it is solely the interest paid.

We will also assume our borrower is in the 22% Federal tax bracket. This deduction results in tax savings of ~$567 in year one.

So, our borrower took on a $40,000 liability resulting in a monthly expense of ~$792 and they will save themselves about $567 in the first year.

Not horrible… IF they were in need of a brand new car and wanted to finance it. However, for someone who is earning less than $100,000, I am hard pressed to believe that financing a brand new vehicle is in their best interest.

Again, at face value, this deduction seems to be a great thing. However, without fully understanding the implications of taking on the debt and monthly payments, I’d venture to say that some will allow for this deduction to drive their decision in financing a brand new car.

Take a look under the hood of the deduction before allowing it to drive a decision… no pun intended.

While this deduction is set to help people, I am not fully convinced it will do more good than harm.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

I hope everyone takes that with a grain of salt. Just trying to lighten the mood. But in all seriousness, yes crypto has been getting crushed. Oddly enough, everything else seems to be working. Stocks continue to chug along.

Subscribe now

Now, the main point of this piece today is to become more accustomed to all-time highs, if you haven’t already. Our generation is no stranger to all-time highs. We have seen them constantly.

But all-time highs are not necessarily a reason to be spooked when it comes to investing. Since I began my career, the S&P 500 has made 170 all-time highs. It was about 4,350 when I first started working at Bone Fide Wealth. A few years later… 7,000.

And that included a full bear market. Feast your eyes on this wonderful chart from my good friend Chart Kid Matt. (Advisors, if you like what you see make sure to check out Exhibit A. Their charts crush it and they are totally custom… check out that YTM logo!)

Source: exhibitaforadvice.com

All-time highs tend to bunch up. Meaning that when the market is on a tear, that tear can continue for a while. The takeaway? All-time highs by themselves are a terrible reason to avoid investing.

Can they be considered in the grand scheme of things? Sure. But they are not the sole reason to avoid investing. If anything, we can argue that all-time highs beget all-time highs.

Now, with that out of the way, I am still hearing a lot of angst around the market and Big Tech or the Mag 7.

Interestingly enough, equal weight S&P 500 is outperforming the market-cap weighted S&P 500 as of recent.

To me, this is not a bad thing at all. This means more participation from smaller companies. A broadening out, if you will.

There have been years in which the largest companies drove all the returns for the S&P 500, but 2026 is already off to a hot start with the equal weighted index showing some strength.

Of course, this is over a one-month time frame, so we have to take it with a grain of salt. Nonetheless, the optimist in me wants to focus on some positives… or at least what I believe is a positive.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

The chart I saw did just that. My friend, Cody Garrett, CFP®, has this amazing table showing a history of the S&P 500 index. Specifically, he highlights the annualized range of returns based on time horizon.

Side note: Cody just wrote a book. It is amazing and has been a great read. He cuts right through the nitty-gritty of taxes and outlines different tax planning strategies. If you’re interested, check it out here.

Subscribe now

Here is the chart:

This is such an awesome visual. I love that we get a worst case and best case scenario for each time period.

First and foremost, let’s look at the 1, 2, 3, and 5-year time periods. Right off the bat, we can see that the range of performance is incredibly wide. For just a 1-year time frame, the return ranged from -43.3% to 54%!

I think this is important to note, especially for young professionals. That exact range is the reason most financial planners do not recommend investing funds that need to be used for an upcoming purchase.

Imagine having $100,000 saved for a down payment on a home and one year later that amount was $57,000?!

Now, the 2 and 3 year period can make that same case. While even the negative annualized return rises, this is annualized. Back to back years of poor performance can compound in reverse!

Note that the spread between the performance narrows as the time horizon extends. While we may feel volatility in markets over days, weeks, and months, the dispersion between returns over the long run fades.

My favorite piece of Cody’s work is year 15. On a rolling basis, there has never been a 15 year period of time in which the S&P 500 had a negative return. How nuts is that?!

Each time period thereafter only looks better. This is what I am talking about when I refer to having a long time horizon. Not only do young professionals have the ability to accumulate assets over a long time frame, but they can also take risks and actually participate in markets over a long period of time.

The market is always going to have periods of poor performance. For someone like me, I no longer even consider it a risk… I have cemented this as fact.

I know the market will pull back, correct and even crash. I don’t know when, I don’t know why, and I don’t know for how long.

I have found a lot of peace in not trying to time the next market cycle. I no longer worry about big drawdowns in the market because I have fully accepted that they will happen. It is no longer a question to me.

My time horizon is longer than the longest time period Cody left for us in the chart. I expect to be an investor for my entire life. Allowing the media, Wall Street, and some Twitter finance “gurus” to derail my plan is not in the cards.

If markets make you nervous, or if market volatility has you on edge, be sure to keep Cody’s work in your back pocket. It can offer a lot of peace of mind.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

Today, I am going to outline some of my favorite ways to put finances in order. Not just once, but permanently. You’ll see that the common denominator here is the idea of a system. Systems work, and automation builds consistency.

Forget about what the market is doing this year. Buckle up. Allow automation to bring structure to your financial life.

Subscribe now

Understand Cash Flows

The backbone of financial planning. Cash flows allow us to identify what an individual needs to be comfortable and what an individual can save.

I’ve mentioned this before and it may seem surprising, but I am not a fan of strict budgeting. Especially for young people.

Our lives are in flux. Things change on a dime. Employment, new connections, even something as simple as a spontaneous night out. There’s one constant between me and my friends at this point in time: we’re all getting busier. Any chance one of them has time to get a bite or grab a drink, I am in. I don’t let a $400 per month allotment for “dining out” govern my life.

I respect those with a strict budget, but I also see how this type of budgeting can become rigid and restrictive, constantly making someone second guess what they can do. Life is not lived within a spreadsheet.

For a very forgiving method of understanding cash flow, check out this old piece! Following this system can allow easy tracking of expenses month over month throughout 2026!

Build a Cash Reserve

To me this is a cornerstone of financial planning. General rules of thumb encourage 3-6 months’ worth of expenses saved as cash. This can vary between profession and the nature of a household.

Many view this as an opportunity cost. Sure, I understand that cash will likely not outperform investments over the long haul.

BUT this cash can be used for emergency and opportunity. This cash pads most things that life throws your way.

It allows us to avoid being forced sellers or forced borrowers when cash is needed. It can safeguard the retirement and investment accounts from needing to sell the lows or borrow money in a time of need.

Most high-yield savings accounts are offering ~3%! Those traditional checking and savings accounts usually offer much lower rates. The switch from traditional savings to HYSA can be meaningful for some!

Review Employer Benefits

There are not many free lunches in personal finance. But an HSA match and 401(k) match are arguably some of the lowest hanging fruits when we look to bolster our retirement savings.

Check in to ensure the full match is being received. These matches can be significant. These matches are quite literally the closest thing to “free-money” that most will ever see!

It is also not a bad time to double check the investments within the retirement accounts. Are they aligned with your risk tolerance?

Do they need to be more diversified? Do they just need a quick rebalance given the market performance last year?

Always a good idea to check in on these items, and hey, while you’re there, check the beneficiary designation as well.

Build Systems

Whether it is saving to a 401(k), HSA, Roth IRA, or brokerage account, automating the savings and investment can allow us a much better chance of sticking with it.

When we view our savings as if they are expenses, something that must occur, it can be easier to stick with it. Additional points to those who are not only automating the investment deposits but also the trading as well!

Building this habit early in a career can give a great financial foundation when income increases.

Removing the emotions behind depositing and trading an account lets us stray from whatever potential financial catastrophe the financial media is covering that week. We know that whether the market is up or down, we are consistently investing each month.

Again, it is the action over the amount. Small amounts to build the habit can be helpful in dipping our toes into the water of the world of markets.

As income grows, steadily increasing these investments is key. At the beginning of our careers, growing our savings rate is one of the main focuses. Pair that with automated, long-term investing and we’re on track to accumulate wealth.

To me, these 4 topics are a great place to begin the year. Rather than giving ourselves the opportunity to make human errors, systems can keep us grounded in building financial routines.

Soon enough, these resolutions will just become ordinary behavior and that is where we want to be.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

It is hard for me to convey how excited I was for this conversation. Hardika and I met a few months ago and her work is absolutely impeccable. She puts out some of the best coverage in the industry… It is no wonder the GOAT, Tom Lee, would want to have an asset like her at Fundstrat.

In a previous life, Hardika wrote for Bloomberg and was a markets reporter at WSJ. Now, she writes daily for Fundstrat while studying for her CFA Level II Exam.

Before we jump into our conversation, I want to make sure everyone is able to follow Hardika on socials. Here is her X account and here is her LinkedIn.

When I got the chance to sit down with Hardika, we dove into a bunch of different topics. As a young professional herself, I think a lot of what she said will resonate with all of you. She was even nice enough to outline some of the biggest potential headwinds the market faces in 2026.

Subscribe now

To follow along, I have italicized all of Hardika’s words, with my questions bolded. Here is how our conversation went:

Cliff: “I’d love to get a little insight as to who you are, how you got your start and what really made you interested in markets. Was there this pivotal moment when you realized you wanted to study and write about markets?”

Hardika: “Growing up in India, I never thought I would do anything related to markets. When I was 17, I left India to study in America and when you’re young, you believe you can tackle anything, you can become anyone. Then you get hit with the reality of so many obstacles in your way. So, I went to journalism school and quickly realized that there were not many jobs as a journalist throughout the country. But I noticed that business journalism is actually one of those rare industries where there are always jobs. So, I leaned into that. By a stroke of luck, I got an internship at Bloomberg. I had to do it remotely during 2020, which wasn’t my favorite, but I was so glad to have gotten that internship. It was only then, at Bloomberg, that I realized that there was this whole world I didn’t know of… The financial world. It’s been years since then but that internship brought the markets into my life. Now I am studying for CFA Level II and constantly learning new things. The amount of things you can learn in the world of finance is crazy.”

Cliff: “And that led you to Fundstrat! Did you know of Fundstrat prior to joining?”

Hardida: “I used to get Fundstrat’s notes as a reporter at WSJ. I kind of knew what they were thinking about markets, I knew their reputation on the street and I was like, I know this firm… I can do this job. Let me have this job, I know I am going to have this job.”

Cliff: “I love that, what an incredible origin story. So with that, I’d love to know what investment principles you keep near and dear to yourself. Is there anything that drives your research or your personal investments?”

Hardika: “Being a reporter had trained me to look at anything with skepticism. Especially when we have periods of exuberance in the markets, we’re trained to question that. So, when I was reporting, I felt this bearish skew towards markets. Moving over to Fundstrat was a huge shift for me because Tom Lee’s typically bullish, even after many things go wrong, he tends to root himself in bullishness. I used to think valuations mattered a lot. They don’t. They don’t matter at all. I know some people really care about them but to me, they are just one tool to help gauge whether to buy or sell something. But by no means was it ever meant to be a North Star in making investment decisions. When you have supercycles like AI, you don’t want to be focused too heavily on valuations because this is so far out in the future. If you think about valuations, you’re going to miss out. And that’s why I think since working at Fundstrat, I’ve started leaning more toward the way Tom Lee thinks: being bullish because historically, stocks outperform just about everything else. And if stocks fall in a short amount of time, that’s a contrarian indicator… they’re going to go back up just as much.”

Cliff: “Awesome. Most of my readers know that I am a long-term optimist when it comes to markets. Now, when you think of allocating your own money to markets, what does this mean to you? Some people are nervous about investing, some have an easier time, how do you practice delayed gratification?”

Hardika: “That’s a profound and deep question. For me it comes down to financial freedom. I saw the effects of delayed gratification through my parents. They invested in real estate, gold, silver, very traditional Indian parent methodology, you know? Their investments empowered me to go to school abroad, which was a huge plus. When I started investing myself, after I got my first job, my little pile of investments slowly grew bigger and bigger. Now, I’m sitting at this comfortable number. Sometimes I don’t even believe it, but it gives me a sense of freedom that if I want to stop working before retirement hits, it’s now potentially an option.”

Cliff: “What is one thing that you tell yourself when the market gets volatile? Not necessarily what you say in the research you publish, but to yourself regarding your own investments? When you looked at your portfolio during April’s tariff tantrum, what did you think?”

Hardika: “I had just opened a fun brokerage account a month before that. I told myself I was going to dollar-cost average and that I wouldn’t touch it no matter what happens. A month later, it started tanking. At first, I thought there was no way this was happening to me. Ultimately, I told myself that if it was going down that quickly, it was a good buying opportunity. I straight up thought to myself, when else am I going to find an opportunity like this? During 2022, I had missed out on big dips such as Meta being down over 60%. Why didn’t I buy that? So, this time around, I told myself I was going to buy big-time. If it’s volatile again this year, that’s just another great buying opportunity. Buy low, sell high.”

Cliff: “I love that framework. For financial professionals, it can be just as hard for us to allocate as it is for anyone else. Now, given you do a lot of research and writing, what are some things you anticipate for 2026?”

Hardika: “I think it’s going to be a very volatile year. We have so many things up in the air and yes, typically if there’s uncertainty in the recent years we have seen it doesn’t have much of an impact on the stock market. But there seem to be higher stakes this year. For example, the Supreme Court tariffs decision, what happens with that? Anyone’s guess. And if they say no, what is the administration’s plan to get tariffs? It’s a very interesting situation because last year tariffs were like the worst thing in the world. Everybody was dreading them, everybody was panicking, pulling out of the market, calling it the end of the America trade. And now we’re kind of in this other seat where we’re like, oh, we need tariffs to keep the market rally going. We’re actually collecting a lot of money out of this. This is great. And I think that eventually once we do get some clarity there, markets can push and rally. But it’s hard for the markets right now to try to continue with this uptrend for a long time. We’ve had a great start to the year. But I think that for it to continue in a meaningful manner, we need to get some clarity regarding the Supreme Court tariff decision. The Fed chair pick too. I think we haven’t seen any impact on the market in a meaningful way from the Fed chair pick being dovish, it’s a really strange situation because I feel like theoretically it’s a worrying thing, right? You want to have the Fed be completely objective, be completely independent, but the market is not on the same page about that, at least from the bets we’re seeing in the bond market. So those are some of the big things I’m thinking about. I think we will get some clarity on those things. By the end of the year we should have a good rally. But until then there might be some pain. And personally speaking as an investor, I would buy, you know, I would buy the dip.”

Cliff: “I love it. This is a great objective take and outlines the potential headwinds the markets may face throughout 2026. With that, I wanted to ask one last question. Was there something we spent too much time paying attention to throughout 2025 that never materialized?”

Hardika: “I think we paid, all of us entirely paid too much attention to DOGE and its promises. And it’s crazy that it was just last year because we almost forgot. It’s like we forgot that happened last year because it was such a mess. It was like watching a dumpster fire. I think the idea of it was very alluring. Cutting waste out of the government and getting that money to pay down our debt or like, at least put it towards projects and things that we want our economy to have. We didn’t grow because of it. We didn’t decline because of it. And the debt picture mostly is unchanged. I think looking back in hindsight, the idea of DOGE was like putting a band aid on this gunshot wound of the fiscal debt crisis that we have going on, rather than like an actual solution to it. So, that was something I feel like all of us paid a little bit too much attention to. And I’ve seen reports that pointed out a lot of the waste that they allegedly cut out from the government were actually inflated numbers or numbers that were not verified.”

Cliff: “Wow, I had almost completely forgotten of the DOGE efforts. We definitely spent a ton of time focusing on how that was going to reduce tons of waste. What is one narrative you think young investors don’t need to pay attention to throughout 2026?”

Hardika: “The second thing that I think young investors should completely ignore this year, it kind of goes back to thinking about your investment journey in very, very long terms. You know, most likely all of us will have a 60 year investing journey. Do you really want to be worried about an AI bubble in your 20s? No. You don’t. Doesn’t matter. Because even if we have some of the biggest contractions, which I’m not saying will happen, but even if you have a huge contraction in the stock market or we have a recession, eventually in 60 years it should go back up. And if it doesn’t, then we have bigger problems. The earth no longer exists. So, I think that all this AI bubble is overhyped. It’s natural to be worried, especially if you’re an older investor because they are so leveraged in stocks right now, more so than they ever have been by some metrics. But for younger investors, it doesn’t make sense to focus too much on that because your investing journey is so long, it’s not going to matter that much at the end of the day.”

Thank you to Hardika for such an awesome interview. She had some amazing insights as we make our way into 2026 and hearing her own experiences in investing is so meaningful. Please be sure to follow her work on LinkedIn. She is going to have a killer year.

*Hardika Singh is employed by Fundstrat Global Advisors, LLC and her views are solely her opinion. This newsletter does not constitute an endorsement of Fundstrat by Bone Fide Wealth.

Disclosures: https://fsinsight.com/disclosures/hardika-singh/

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author and his guest based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

That is a stellar year. Silver did even better, ending the year up over 140%. These two assets had somewhat of a Cinderella story in 2025. They were largely not paid any attention throughout the past 5 years. Well, not entirely. Peter Schiff has been shouting from the rooftops since before I was born.

Subscribe now

With everyone a bit antsy about the performance and constant media coverage, FOMO has crept in.

I think I have driven the point home that I am a full believer in risk-adjusted, long-term portfolios. When an asset class like this goes parabolic, I always want to add some context.

For those that saw this coming, my hat is off to you. Great trade. For the passive investor like myself who might be feeling some FOMO, let’s pump the brakes.

Here is a chart of a Silver Trust from Google Finance.

Why is this important? Well, you can see that although silver has been recognized as an asset for about 6,000 years, it is not necessarily something that has consistently gained value year over year.

Over the same timeframe (April 2006 - today), the S&P 500 is up roughly 423%, without accounting for dividends that could’ve been reinvested. And, we have to note that silver has made a significant amount of those gains as of recent.

I can assure you that no one felt any FOMO during this decade’s span of time when silver went absolutely nowhere.

I’m not here to say gold and silver are bad or good. They are just assets that market participants buy in hopes of selling at a higher price down the line. Pretty standard in the investment world.

Ultimately, I want to pose things differently than the traditional finance media would. Rather than talking about what a stellar 2025 silver had, let me rephrase:

“If an asset was dead flat for over a decade, would you still continue to allocate?”

For those that were allocating consistently to silver, they are now sitting on a handsome unrealized gain. However, it took years. For some, more than a decade to really see any significant gains.

The lesson here is patience. The hardest part of investing is doing nothing or continuing to build positions as nothing is happening or better yet, when they are falling apart.

When an asset class performs, it is really easy to want to join in on the potential fun. I’m more focused on the long-term wealth accumulation to let one year of returns for an asset class derail my approach.

Bonus content:

Gains on collectibles such as precious metals are taxed differently than most capital assets. Collectibles qualifying for long-term capital gains treatment can be taxed at a maximum of 28% federally! Much higher than the 20% we’d associate with stocks, bonds, etc.

Double bonus:

I had the privilege of writing for Barron’s last week. If you want to know my top 3 reasons for hiring a financial advisor, check it out here!

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

With 2025 coming to a close, I wanted to review an incredible year.

Subscribe now

First off, I am more than halfway through my Tax Planning Certified Professional™ coursework and exams. Expect much more coverage on tax items to come throughout 2026.

I am also just one semester away from completing my MBA! Thus far, it has been a great experience. Shoutout to a few of my fellow classmates who might be reading this!

Before we get to who I met, I wanted to share some articles in which I was quoted. It may be helpful for my younger audience, and there is a wide variety of content covered in each.

Here are the lines:

1. How to build the perfect investor: 50% Gen X and 50% Gen Z: What today’s younger investors can learn from their parents, and vice versa

2. This should be your ‘last resort’ to cover an emergency expense, financial advisor says

3. With bitcoin down to around $90,000, should you rethink how much crypto to own? Here’s what experts say.

4. How I Broke Into the RIA Space Right Out of College: This young advisor got his big break after seeing an opening on social media.

I have been reading Barron’s since I was 18 or 19. Getting the privilege to put my own words out in Barron’s meant the world.

Now, as far as who I met, this year in particular stands out. I spent a significant amount of time networking, meeting new people, and building real relationships for new insights into everything markets, tax, and personal finance.

I also attended two Future Proof conferences. If you’re in the space and have yet to attend, you’re doing yourself a disservice. It opened the door for tons of opportunities. From there, I attended more local conferences, happy hours, and financial meetups. It was a blast.

Who I met:

Dan Ives and Tom Lee: Some of the ultimate GOATs. Tom and Dan have been at the forefront of the market for a while now. They are two people I always want to hear from, especially when the market gets volatile.

That same day at Future Proof, I had the opportunity to meet with Brent Sullivan. He writes Tax Alpha Insider and is what we like to call a “tax wizard.” His content is absolutely next level.

Always a good time meeting up with my fellow young professionals. Here’s me with the next-gen crew. Caleb Franzen, who writes Cubic Analytics, Sean Russo of Ritholtz Wealth Management, Max Motz of Fundstrat, and Chart Kid Matt of Exhibit A! (in that order)

I can’t forget about the awesome live recording of The Compound and Friends that I attended with Jim Cramer, Josh Brown, and Michael Batnick. These guys have been at it a while! It was great to hear their thoughts live.

I even got to get out for a coffee with Phil Rosen. Phil co-founded and writes Opening Bell Daily. It was awesome to catch up, and after about 5 minutes, we were trying to understand how we hadn’t met previously. Looking forward to catching up with Phil in 2026! (Shoutout Todd Sohn for the introduction!!)

Most recently, I got an invite to the CMT Association’s end-of-year party! So you know I had to get a pic with Jay Woods and Sam Ro!

Last but not least! We put together a little happy hour back in November, and I got to meet two awesome people. Hardika Singh and Kevin Brady! Hardika is putting out some of the best market commentary in the game on a regular basis over at Fundstrat. Funny enough, Kevin and I have been connected for years now! This was our first in-person encounter. Kevin is the man and has been offering me guidance over the last few years as I cut my teeth in the industry.

There were many more awesome people that I got to meet, but I’m going to cap it here! YTM is going to be taking a much-needed rest next week for NYE.

Expect a lot more from me in 2026! Hopefully, we can take YTM to the next level! Wishing an awesome 2026 to all of the YTM squad!

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share

A ton of parallels have been drawn between Cisco in the ‘00s bubble and Nvidia. Cisco’s price-to-earnings ratio, a common ratio used in high-level valuation analysis, peaked at 200x. Nvidia currently stands somewhere in the mid-40s. Hot? Sure. Bubble territory? Not until earnings don’t follow the price, which has largely happened over the last 5 years.

These Mag 7 stocks and a few outside of AI companies are not necessarily the dot-com stocks. Their valuations, while arguably a bit high, are not absurdly overpriced… at least in my opinion.

Inflation is still kicking around, and we’re talking about some rate cuts in the new year with a potential change to the Fed Chairman.

*insert, “Get in loser, we’re gonna run it hot” meme*

Subscribe now

Call me naive, but I don’t see a cataclysmic decline like the dot-com bubble on the horizon. (Come back to this and clown me if I’m wrong.)

Nonetheless, I keep seeing tons of takes about today’s market mirroring that of the dot-com bubble. For reference, the NASDAQ lost nearly 80% of its value. There is no way to skew that positively. An 80% drawdown is absolutely decimating.

The S&P performed slightly better, with only a ~50% loss. These are staggering losses, and I promise I am not trying to diminish how terribly these losses would feel.

The Dow Jones lost around 38% of its value. This is a more modest drawdown relative to its counterparts, the S&P 500 and NASDAQ.

Here is some bubble coverage for you! If you didn’t know of this, great. Most of it stands to spook you and get your gears turning. Making even the most rational investors second-guess themselves.

So, with all these people calling for a dot-com bubble repeat, I started thinking about how to phrase this back to them.

When someone says, “This is exactly like the dot-com bubble.”

I’m going to respond with: “Oh, really? So you’re calling for Dow 200,000 by 2050.”

The Dow is currently at ~48,500. That’d be a gain of over 300%.

Is that insane? Let’s find out. Below is each index and its value at the peak of the dot-com bubble:

S&P 500: 1,552

DJIA: 11,750

NASDAQ: 5,048

Here are the current values:

S&P 500: 6,816

DJIA: 48,414

NASDAQ: 23,057

The percentage gain (excluding dividends reinvested) from the peak of the dot-com bubble to today:

S&P 500: 339%

DJIA: 312%

NASDAQ: 357%

Over 25 years, each index is up over 300%. So, if you want to tell me that today is a bubble that will play out exactly as the dot-com bubble did, are you telling me the Dow will be at 200,000 by the time I am 50?

Are you saying the S&P 500 will be at 27,272 and the NASDAQ at 100,000?!

Of course, we can’t know what will happen, and I highly doubt that this market will follow exactly in the same path as the dot-com bubble, but I think posing it this way can allow us to flip the switch and emphasize the importance of long-term time horizons.

Oh, you think the market is due for a crash in the next year? Awesome… where do you see it in 25-years, where do you see it in 30-years?

I’ll leave everyone with this:

“Far more money has been lost by investors trying to anticipate corrections, than lost in the corrections themselves”

- Peter Lynch

*Note: All charts used were from Google Finance.

This is for informational purposes only and is not intended as legal or investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security or strategy. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and financial situation. Opinions expressed in this commentary reflect subjective judgments of the author based on conditions at the time of publication and are subject to change without notice. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Share