|Bid||0.00 x 800|
|Ask||0.00 x 900|
|Day's Range||151.40 - 154.02|
|52 Week Range||99.67 - 162.53|
|Beta (3Y Monthly)||0.80|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||37.41|
|Earnings Date||Oct 23, 2019|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||1.12 (0.74%)|
|1y Target Est||75.00|
Barclays initiated Beyond Meat at overweight, claiming the meat-alternative company is ‘well-positioned' in the market. Yahoo Finance's Jen Rogers, Myles Udland, Andy Serwer and Brian Sozzi discuss on The Final Round.
French energy giant EDF announced increased costs to its long-troubled flagship nuclear project at Flamanville on Wednesday as it confirmed delays to the opening of the plant due to faulty weldings. The company said construction costs would rise by €1.5bn to €12.4bn and the loading of nuclear fuel would be delayed until the end of 2022, which had previously been scheduled for the end of 2019 with commercial activity starting in 2020. Flamanville was originally expected to cost €3.3bn and start operations in 2012.
CHICAGO , Oct. 4, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- The board of directors of Morningstar, Inc. (Nasdaq: MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, today declared a quarterly dividend of 28 cents ...
In the news release, Morningstar's Third Annual Health Savings Account Study Shows Progress But Also Room for the Industry to Lower Fees and Improve Transparency, issued 01-Oct-2019 by Morningstar, Inc. over PR Newswire, we are advised by the company that the "Upgrades and downgrades" bullet point, second sentence, should begin "On the flipside, UMB Bank and Optum's investing" rather than "On the flipside, UMB Bank, Fifth Third, and Optum's investing" and in the table the Overall Assessment as Investing Account column for Fifth Third should read "Neutral" rather than "Negative" as originally issued inadvertently.
(Bloomberg) -- Not too long ago, Charles Schwab Corp. helped to usher in the golden age of low-cost, online stock trading.Now, the brokerage may help to kill off the fee-based business model altogether.On Tuesday, Schwab said it will eliminate commissions on trades for all U.S. stocks and exchange traded funds. The announcement -- which was quickly matched by rival TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. after markets closed -- sent shock waves across Wall Street. Shares of E*Trade Financial Corp. slumped 16%, while TD Ameritrade lost more than a quarter of its stock market value. Schwab’s share price also took a hit, tumbling nearly 10%.The gambit is just the latest in an intensifying, industry-wide war over fees for everything from stock trades to index funds and financial advice. And it’s squeezing not only the likes of Schwab, but also BlackRock Inc. and Fidelity Investments. These types of aggressive price cuts -- admittedly a small boon for ordinary Americans routinely nickel-and-dimed by financial firms -- have some observers wondering whether anyone can win in a business where more and more services are handed out for free.For Schwab, it’s a bold, but risky move. The firm, which relies less on trading commissions than its competitors, is betting it can offset any decline of revenue by attracting more clients. It can then use their assets to generate interest income, an essential feature of its business that’s come under pressure recently as interest rates have declined.“Maybe because of the inception and growth spurt of online brokers during the dot-com boom, there’s a romanticization of the individual trader,” said Michael Wong, an analyst at Morningstar Inc. “There’s still a mindset among the investing public around the importance of commissions,” which is less important to Schwab.While trading costs have declined across the board, Schwab comes from a position of relative strength. The firm takes in just 7% of its net revenue from commissions. That’s far less than Interactive Brokers Group Inc. or TD Ameritrade, which both collect more than a third from trading fees.Schwab estimated it could lose up to $400 million in revenue a year from its zero-fee offering. Wong said that in the current rate environment, the firm would need roughly $20 billion or more in new deposits to offset that loss. Currently, over half of Schwab’s net revenue comes from interest earned on its assets. The firm, which oversaw $3.72 trillion as of Aug. 31, took in almost $20 billion in net new assets that month.Schwab last cut its trading commissions in February 2017, when it reduced them to $4.95 per trade from $6.95 to match Fidelity. Since then, assets at the firm have grown by about $800 billion from a combination of market gains and net new inflows.Nevertheless, the company is looking for ways to reduce costs internally. Last month, Schwab said it would cut 600 jobs, or about 3% of its workforce, because of the “increasingly challenging economic environment.”Its latest move builds on an increasingly aggressive, slash-and-burn approach to price reductions. Late Tuesday, TD Ameritrade said it would match Schwab’s no-fee trading offer at a cost of as much as $240 million a quarter, or roughly 16% of its net revenue. Interactive Brokers announced just last week that it would provide free trades. And in recent months, Fidelity, Vanguard Group and JPMorgan Chase & Co. have all taken steps to eliminate fees and commissions on some offerings.According to Schwab Chief Financial Officer Peter Crawford, zero commissions are an inevitable industry trend. Schwab is just trying to get ahead of that.“We are seeing new firms trying to enter our market -- using zero or low equity commissions as a lever,” Crawford wrote. “We’re not feeling competitive pressure from these firms ... yet. But we don’t want to fall into the trap that a myriad of other firms in a variety of industries have fallen into and wait too long to respond to new entrants. It has seemed inevitable that commissions would head towards zero, so why wait?’The developments show just how online stock trading is becoming a commoditized business. As a result, Devin Ryan, an analyst at JMP Securities, says brokerages will need to use their platforms to generate revenue from other services. Those include securities lending, charging asset managers fees to offer their funds, and advisory services.“They have to give a lot away for free to charge for parts of their platform that are less commoditized,” Ryan said. Firms like TD Ameritrade might start charging subscription fees for access to data, options and margin accounts.It’s not just brokerages that are facing pressure to cut prices. Fund managers like BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street Corp. have also been forced to reduce the fees they charge, particularly for index-tracking funds. On the day that Fidelity announced it would offer several free index mutual funds last year, shares of other asset managers took a hit.While the splashy introduction of a free product may attract a lot of customer attention, it could also backfire, according to Dan Ariely, a behavioral economics professor at Duke University.“The odds are that what people will do is to say, ‘Schwab is offering these services for free, and so they can offer everything for free,”’ he said. The risk is that “when Schwab tries to get these same consumers to do something that costs money, they may say, ‘No thanks.’”\--With assistance from Suzanne Woolley.To contact the reporters on this story: Annie Massa in New York at email@example.com;John Gittelsohn in Los Angeles at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Alan Mirabella at email@example.com, Michael Tsang, Vincent BielskiFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
CHICAGO, Oct. 1, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, today published its third annual study assessing 11 of the most prominent Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) available to individuals. Morningstar evaluated the providers' success in responding to two different use cases: as an investment account to save for future medical expenses and as a spending account to cover current medical costs. The study found that while the industry has shown progress over the past year, there's still room for providers to lower fees, simplify investment menus and account rules, and boost transparency to make it easier to compare providers.
The paper's title caught me by surprise. "The 50% Rule: Keep More Profit in Your Wallet," by Stuart Lucas, chairman of the financial advisory firm Wealth Strategist Partners, advocates that investors retain at least half the profits generated in their taxable accounts, thereby giving less than half to government bodies and investment professionals. With mutual fund expense ratios less than 1% for most large funds, investors surely need not leak anything like 50% of their profits. Percentage of investor profits, after all, is quite different from percentage of assets.
CHICAGO , Sept. 23, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (Nasdaq: MORN) plans to report its third-quarter 2019 financial results after the market closes on Wednesday, October 23, 2019 . The company does ...
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- The U.K. Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) is the nation’s biggest steward of public sector retirement savings by membership, responsible for the nest eggs almost 6 million members worth 275 billion pounds ($342 billion). So the revelation that it’s under pressure from the government to shift more of its money into passive products should be a wake-up call to a stock-picking industry still reeling from the Neil Woodford debacle.Jeff Houston, secretary to the pension plan’s advisory board, told the Financial Times that “there are elements within government that want the LGPS to be passive” in the wake of Woodford’s move to freeze his fund earlier this year. About 60% of the scheme’s assets are currently with active managers.Now, no-one should be in favor of government meddling in the investment preferences of an independent body. (As a thought experiment, imagine how odious it would be if the executive suggested that LGPS should switch funds into U.K. gilts and away from equities, effectively pressing it to lend to the government by buying its debt.) And Houston didn’t identify who in government was questioning the LGPS’s strategy.But the disclosure reflects conversations that are taking place at pension providers, charities and other custodians of other people’s money across Europe. And while the region has been slower than the U.S. to embrace the shift toward lower-cost index trackers, the global trend away from active managers is clearly accelerating. In the U.S., the revolution has already been televised. Last month, the amount allocated to passively-managed U.S. equities outstripped those in active strategies for the first time ever, according to figures compiled by Morningstar Inc. Index-tracking U.S. equity funds climbed to $4.271 trillion in August, beating the $4.246 overseen by active managers, my Bloomberg News colleague John Gittelsohn reported last week. U.S. investors have been quicker than their European peers to embrace exchange-traded funds, which is the main product allowing savers access to low-cost products that track benchmark indexes. The U.S. market is worth almost $3.9 trillion, compared with just $890 billion in Europe, according to figures compiled by research firm ETFGI. The U.S. ETF market has more than quadrupled in size this decade, while its European equivalent has only tripled.But the momentum in Europe is gathering pace. At Amundi SA, Europe’s biggest asset manager, passively-managed funds accounted for 7.7% of the 1.5 trillion euros ($1.7 trillion) of its total assets by the middle of this year, up from 6.6% at the end of 2018 and 5.8% in 2017. Exclude the firm’s substantial Treasury holdings that are mostly held in cash, however, and the passive percentage climbs to 9% this year.And the ETF market is attracting money even as other parts of the fund management industry suffer outflows. Amundi’s passive business, for example, had net inflows of 7 billion euros in the first half of 2019.So far this year, the supply of ETFs in Europe has grown by almost 23 percent, handily beating the 16.5 percent expansion in the U.S. In the past three years, the volume of European ETFs has increased by almost eight percentage points more than in the U.S. Even with that growth, the bulk of Europe’s savings are still in active products.U.S. active managers who have reacted to the threat to their livelihoods by calling index funds a bubble are whistling past the graveyard, as my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Nir Kaissar argued earlier this week. The overseers of European portfolios should brace for the day when passively-managed money overtakes its active counterpart – a day which is probably coming sooner rather than later.To contact the author of this story: Mark Gilbert at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Stephanie Baker at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Mark Gilbert is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering asset management. He previously was the London bureau chief for Bloomberg News. He is also the author of "Complicit: How Greed and Collusion Made the Credit Crisis Unstoppable."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Research from Value Line, S&P;, Morningstar and the like are useful when looking at stocks, but before acting on the suggestions, remember to take a whiff and see if they're no good.
In Steal Like an Artist, author (and artist) Austin Kleon argues that nothing is completely original--we learn by copying. Kleon isn't suggesting that plagiarism is OK. Rather, he tells readers that they should collect good ideas and allow themselves to be influenced by them.
The stock market's major indices are at or near all-time highs, and as stocks go up, dividend yields go down. As a result, many of the best dividend stocks to buy right now sport relatively modest yields.That's OK. Because your focus also should be on dividend safety and payout growth that will enhance your yield over time.Not every stock has been caught up in 2019's surge to new peaks. GameStop (GME), CenturyLink (CTL), Vodafone (VOD), Pitney Bowes (PBI), L Brands (LB), Deutsche Bank (DB) - all of these well-known companies have either cut or outright suspended their dividends this year. Those moves were a blow to all existing shareholders, but especially those who were relying on the income from these sometimes generous dividend payers to tackle regular expenses in retirement.How do you ensure the dividend stocks you're invested in won't do the same? One way is to monitor the DIVCON system from exchange-traded fund provider Reality Shares. DIVCON's methodology uses a five-tier rating to provide a snapshot of companies' dividend health, where DIVCON 5 indicates the highest probability for a dividend increase, and DIVCON 1 the highest probability for a dividend cut. And within each of these ratings is a composite score determined by cash flow, earnings, stock buybacks and other factors.These are 13 of the safest dividend stocks to buy right now. Each stock has not only achieved a DIVCON 5 score, but a composite score within the top 15 of all stocks that DIVCON has evaluated. This makes them the crème de la crème of dividend safety - and more likely to keep the dividend increases coming going forward. SEE ALSO: 25 Stocks Every Retiree Should Own
CHICAGO, Sept. 17, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, today published the first chapter of its biennial Global Investor Experience (GIE) report, which grades the experiences of mutual fund investors in 26 markets across North America, Europe, Asia, and Africa. For this sixth edition of GIE, Morningstar is publishing each of the evaluation categories—Fees and Expenses, Regulation and Taxation, Disclosures, and Sales—as independent chapters.
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Spoiler alert: Index funds are no bubble.It’s not terribly surprising that active managers loathe index funds. It can’t be pleasant to watch their time-honored craft reduced to a computer program and sold for a pittance. Some managers have fought back by accusing index funds of promoting monopolies and distorting markets, among other horrors, but it hasn’t stemmed the wave of money flowing to index products.Even Jim Cramer, TV’s most famous stock picker, has been converted. He recently confessed on his show “Mad Money” that “I have not ever point-blank warned you off individual stocks, so let me do so tonight. I would actually vastly prefer you to invest in index funds than to be, say, in mutual funds.”Still, active managers could take comfort in the fact that more money was entrusted to them than their indexing nemeses — until now. As Bloomberg News reported last week, assets in index-based U.S. equity mutual funds and exchange-traded funds topped those run by stock pickers for the first time in August. After accounting for last month’s fund flows, Morningstar Inc. estimates that $4.271 trillion is invested in U.S. stock index funds, compared with $4.246 trillion in those run by stock pickers.Active managers still oversee more money in bonds and international stocks, but their results are no more flattering than those of U.S. stock pickers, so it’s only a matter of time before index funds overtake them, too. According to the latest SPIVA scorecard, 90% of actively managed international stock mutual funds and 96% of emerging-market ones lost to their benchmarks over the last 15 years through 2018. The overwhelming majority of bond funds also failed to keep up with their benchmarks over the same period. Facing an existential crisis, active managers are now trying to scare investors out of index funds by hanging the dreaded B-word on indexing. Hedge fund manager Michael Burry, hero of “The Big Short” who made a fortune shorting the housing market before it imploded in 2008, called indexing a bubble in an interview with Bloomberg earlier this month, just the latest money maven to do so.It’s a frivolous claim because index funds are merely a vehicle, not an investment per se. It’s like calling brokerage accounts or safe deposit boxes or wallets a bubble — it’s not the container that matters, but what’s inside it. Index funds track a wide range of global investments, including stocks, bonds, real estate, commodities and currencies. Surely not all of them are bubbles.There’s no single definition of a bubble, and it’s difficult to spot one without the benefit of hindsight, but they’re commonly characterized by a buying frenzy that results in an unusual surge in prices. Think cryptocurrencies in 2017, when Hodlers bid up the price of Bitcoin 24-fold in one year. While it’s hard to think of any investment tracked by index funds with a comparably meteoric rise, it’s easy to think of ones that investors are avoiding, such as financial and energy stocks in the U.S. and many stock markets around the world. The fact that index funds track those markets hasn’t made them any more appealing. So when Burry and others call indexing a bubble, I suspect their primary complaint is that investors are blindly pouring money into index funds that track the broad U.S. stock market and are thus propelling it to lofty levels. U.S. stocks are not cheap, and by some measures the market has been this expensive only once before, during the peak of the dot-com bubble in 2000. There’s little evidence, however, that active managers as a group are any more discerning than indexers. By conventional measures, U.S. stock pickers are paying just as much for stocks. I counted 5,204 actively managed U.S. equity mutual funds, including their various share classes. Their average price-to-book ratio is 3.4, according to Morningstar data, compared with 3.2 for the broad-market Russell 3000 Index. Their price-to-sales ratio is 2.2, based on last year’s financial results, compared with 2.1 for the index. Their price-to-earnings ratio is 21.1, compared with 21 for the index. And their price-to-cash flow ratio is 13.9, compared with 13 for the index.It’s not as if stock pickers have no choice. On the contrary, they have many opportunities to hunt for bargains if they, like Burry, believe that indexers are overpaying. The difference in valuation between the Russell 3000 Growth Index and the Russell 3000 Value Index, as measured by their P/E ratios, is higher today than at any point since 2000. The same is true between the Russell 1000 Index, which tracks large and midsize companies, and the Russell 2000 Index, which tracks smaller firms.But shopping for cheaper and smaller companies would mean straying from popular broad-market gauges like the S&P 500 Index, which are dominated by larger firms and packed with expensive growth stocks. Few managers have the stomach for that because clients get annoyed when those gauges soar and their portfolios fail to keep pace. As legendary money manager Barton Biggs reputedly warned, “Bullish and wrong and clients are angry; bearish and wrong and they fire you.”Burry is probably right that many U.S. stocks are too expensive, but that’s no fault of index funds. There’s plenty of blame to go around, starting with the stock pickers. To contact the author of this story: Nir Kaissar at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Daniel Niemi at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Nir Kaissar is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the markets. He is the founder of Unison Advisors, an asset management firm. He has worked as a lawyer at Sullivan & Cromwell and a consultant at Ernst & Young. For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
In his book Thinking, Fast and Slow , Nobel Prize-winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman discusses how he stumbled upon two different approaches to forecasting while working for Israel's Ministry of Education to write a high school textbook about judgment and decision-making. Kahneman and his longtime collaborator Amos Tversky ultimately branded these two schools of forecasting "the inside view" and "the outside view." The inside view is deeply personal.
CHICAGO , Sept. 13, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (Nasdaq: MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, today reported estimated U.S. mutual fund and exchange-traded fund (ETF) ...
CHICAGO , Sept. 11, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (Nasdaq: MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, published a summary of Morningstar Analyst Rating™ activity for 149 U.S. ...
CHICAGO, Sept. 9, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Morningstar, Inc. (MORN), a leading provider of independent investment research, today launched Goal Bridge, a planning and proposal solution that enables advisors to connect goals-based planning and investment strategies within a single, dynamic workflow. Goal Bridge, available now as an add-on for Morningstar Advisor Workstation and soon as a standalone Enterprise Component, is powered by Morningstar research and grounded in behavioral science.
More and more 401(k) investors are opting to be hands-off. A recent report by the Investment Company Institute and the Employee Benefits Research Institute found that more than half of 401(k) participants were invested in a target-date fund at the end of 2016. But not all 401(k) participants are following that trend.
Morningstar's rating system is highly regarded, but how accurate is it? We review how the system works and other approaches that might work better.