investing

In this podcast, Motley Fool analyst Jason Moser and contributors Travis Hoium and Jon Quast discuss:

• How 2025 compares to 1999 and 2007.
• What they wish they had known in the past.
• Energy’s role in AI.

To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool’s free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you’re ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy.

A full transcript is below.

This podcast was recorded on Oct. 10, 2025.

Travis Hoium: How does the market in 2025 fit into the history of the stock market? Motley Fool Money starts now.

Welcome to Motley Fool Money. I’m Travis Hoium joined today by Jon Quast and Jason Moser, and I think this is an important time in the market. Take a step back and look at a little bit of context in history. There are these decade long trends that we typically go through, and it seems like we’re either at the beginning or end of one of those with artificial intelligence and all of the companies that are going crazy right now. I want to get your guys’ thoughts on where we are. We all see the potential of artificial intelligence, but the Internet was a massive opportunity in 1999. Mobile was a huge opportunity in 2007. That didn’t stop the crashes that ensued. What historic parallels, Jason do you see in the market today that investors can learn from?

Jason Moser: Yeah well, I love this idea. I think there are a lot of parallels we can draw here. There are some similarities and I think there are some differences as well. You go back to for example, the buildout of the Internet back in 1999, the .com crash that ensued. I mean, there’s a lot of similarities from then to what’s going on today. There’s massive infrastructure buildout. It’s the foundation for what looks to be a new era of technology. It’s also accompanied by a lot of speculation in the markets. We’re seeing that in the form of a lot of nosebleed valuations. I mean, I’m not saying they’re all nosebleed valuations, but there is some data that shows that AI first companies today that are coming to market, are getting 20-40% premium valuations over their non AI driven types of companies. Then you’re also seeing some of the most speculative names are garnering valuations in the neighborhood of 200 times sales.

Travis Hoium: Some of them have gone parabolic just in the past few.

Jason Moser: Yeah, absolutely. I understand the enthusiasm, but there was an interesting interview with Orlando Bravo the other day on TV. He heads up the firm Toma Bravo which they specialize in SAS software and stuff like that. The question that was posed as it’s been posed to most of us is, are we in a bubble? He answered simply yes. I mean, you can’t have companies that are working on $50 million in annualized recurring revenue value to $10 billion, that just doesn’t work. It’s not sustainable. At some point, we will see that shift. But I do think there are some differences too. I mean, primarily, you look at the physical restraints of what was being built out back in 1999, that was laying all that optic cable. Physically difficult to do, but a little bit different than really the restraint today. Now we’re talking about power. We’re trying to figure out how to get the electricity, the power to really make all of this stuff run. I think funding is a little bit more realistic this time around just because so much of it is coming from the hyperscalers. Let’s put OpenAI aside here and look at the other companies, your Amazons, your Alphabets, your NVIDIAs of the world that are helping to fund a lot of this. When you have businesses that are that big with more reliable cash flows, I think the funding side of it seems to be a little bit less speculative than it was back then.

Travis Hoium: Do you think that has changed over the past, even the past few weeks with things like guaranteeing revenue? I think, you know, India did that with CR weave. You’re seeing more variable interest entities or they’re going by different names now, but it’s basically doing some of these financings off balance sheet. That’s what ultimately got Enron in trouble. That isn’t necessarily a parallel that we want to go down, but it’s one of those things where there are these small red flags that you can look throughout history and go, Okay, when you start to see this happen, you should perk up a little bit.

Jason Moser: I think you need to be asking the questions. I think it’s no accident that this week we really saw a lot of those maps circulating around that were showing the intertwinenss of all of these. It’s just a handful of companies that are really dictating the space and you want to put some numbers around it. I mean, this is what really makes me nervous. I think you look at Morgan Stanley research. They say that OpenAI itself, they make up more than $300 billion of this something like $880 billion total future contract value that’s tied to the spending with Microsoft, Oracle, and CR weave, among others. You think about that in the context of the fact that OpenAI, I mean, they just generated basically $13 billion annualized at the midpoint of 2025, and they’re losing money still hand over fist. Where that capital ultimately comes from I think, is a question that investors really need to be focused in on. It’s not to say that OpenAI won’t continue to grow, but that is a big Delta that they’re going to have to figure out a way to shore up.

Travis Hoium: Jon, how do you think about this in a more historical context? What things are you trying to learn from history that could maybe apply today?

Jon Quast: Well, I think historically, whenever you see something new and exciting, investors are wanting in on that and they’re not wanting to miss out. I’d say that applies to both retail investors and private equity investors. You can see that in a couple of fronts here that there are some companies, I think, that are preying on that, taking advantage of that, knowing that investors are willing to pay up for the excitement, the admission to the theme park. You look at the public markets, for example, look at special purpose acquisition companies.

Travis Hoium: These are SPACs. This is what was really popular in 2020 and 2021.

Jon Quast: Yeah, right before we had major, major pullback in so many of the companies out there. These are companies that don’t even have a business. They’re saying, give us money so we can go buy a business. Many of them came forward in 2020, 2021. There’s been a couple of years of a lull but now this year, we have 161 that have gone and filed so far this year, and the years not even over yet. That’s as much as basically the last three years combined. I’m not saying that they’re all bad opportunities. I’m not even saying that most, but I’m saying somewhere in there, the data is saying, yeah, somebody is taking advantage of a situation where investors are very excited and they’re willing to pay for a lottery ticket, essentially. The same thing in the private equity space, you look at the AI private companies out there starting to do perhaps some questionable things, maybe counting some one time deals as part of the calculation in their annual recurring revenue and doing that so that they can boost their valuations, and that increases the amount of funding that they’re able to get from these private investors. We would think that private investors are a little bit smarter than that. But again, I mean, we all have human psychology, and we don’t want to miss out on something that is truly transformative in artificial intelligence.

Travis Hoium: Jason, you brought up those images that are going around. There’s one from the FT, there’s one from Bloomberg, just show this web around OpenAI. One of the things that I think I learned in the 2008, 2009, downfall of the market and the recession that ensued was things just got really, really complicated when a lot of things didn’t need to be complicated. We started with mortgages, mortgage is a fairly straightforward financial instrument, but then you start turning it into 48 different products that you’re cutting into different pieces, and nobody knows where the risk is or who’s holding the risk. That’s what I get concerned about right now is, if AI is such a no brainer and it’s such a high return on investment, then why do we need all this complicated these complicated financial structures? Again, it’s just raising red flags to me. Let me put it this way because I think what we’re trying to do today is take a little bit of our knowledge and pass it on to everybody who’s listening. If you are going to go back, Jason, I’ll start with you, if you were going to go back and talk to yourself in 1999 or 2007, what would you tell yourself that you could maybe implement as an investor?

Jason Moser: Wow, yeah. I like that question a lot. I think if I look back to 1999, while I was investing at the time, I wasn’t a member of the Motley Fools. I think, first and foremost, and I’m being dead serious here, I would have told myself to get a subscription to the Motley Fool because from an educational perspective alone, I think that style of thinking, that style of investing and taking that longer term view is just invaluable. I’d also say, wow, it’s tempting. Steer clear of speculation. I think you’re right. One of the big problems back in 2007/8 was just how ununderstandable that web of financial instruments ultimately became. I think that was a result of greed primarily. But I also look at today and you’re talking about these special interest entities and whatnot. Money isn’t limitless and so I think they start to make it a little bit more complicated when they need to figure out ways to raise more money. That becomes a little bit more concerning as well. I’d say, for me, I’d steer clear speculation. These were stretches of time when some of the great businesses of our time went on sale. Stay focused on owning those high quality businesses, leave the speculating to those who think they probably know what they’re doing and maybe don’t necessarily actually know.

Travis Hoium: Jon, what do you think?

Jon Quast: So 1999, I wasn’t an investor yet, and so it didn’t really start for me until around the great recession.

Travis Hoium: You weren’t investing, but do you remember feeling the.com bubble and crash? Because I think that is an interesting until you actually have money in the market, it is kind of ah, this thing happens, but it doesn’t really affect me.

Jon Quast: Well, I would say absolutely not. I mean, just where we were in our little corner of North Carolina back in those days, I mean, man, we had dial up Internet. I mean, we weren’t even all that aware of what was going on. For me, the great recession was where I really began to take investing seriously. What I tell myself, besides what Jason already said was, I wish that I had just held on to my original vintage of stocks that I invested in. I know it’s 20 years later now, but I look at some of the ones that I had at the time. Buffalo Wild Wings, which is no longer publicly traded, but if I’d just held onto Buffalo Wild Wings from the time I invested until the time that it went private, it was a 10 bagger or more, and I sold after it doubled. I owned Marvel back before Disney acquired it and sold around the time of the announcement. I wish I had just held onto Disney all that time. McDonald’s was one of the first stocks I ever bought. Yeah, maybe that’s not the flashiest thing, but it’s up over 1,000% with dividends. I know some of the listeners are saying, hey, well, that’s 20 years ago, but let me tell you something. For me, it’s 20 minutes. I just started investing. Time goes by so fast. At the time you say, invest for three years, invest for five years. How could you ever? Twenty years is a heartbeat. Man, I wish I could just go back and say, hang on. Don’t try to get cute. Don’t try to buy and sell, trade, all this. Just buy and hold.

Travis Hoium: Yeah, Jon, the lessons that I have learned more than anything is not selling to give you an idea of what I owned in those days that I sold Chipotle, Apple, these are Las Vegas Sands. I remember buying for $2 a share. I think that was a 20 bagger over the next couple of years that I sold too early. Yeah, owning those companies that aren’t going anywhere that can survive any downturn, I would also say start paying attention to balance sheets. Because if companies are going to not survive, it’s not going to be the revenue drops a little bit. It’s going to be because there’s more risk on the balance sheet than they can handle. Something to keep in mind. When we come back, we are going to talk more about this buildout and where there could be opportunities you’re listening to Motley Fool money.

Come back to Motley Fool Money. One of the big topics of the AI buildout has been energy, and this has gotten a lot more attention over the past couple of months. Every hyperscalar, every Neo Cloud is looking for basically as much energy as they can get. Some of them have made deals with Bitcoin miners. I think that’s an interesting play here. Bitcoin Miners spent a lot of time building out the energy they need to run their mining equipment. Now we’re moving that to AI. Jon, where are the opportunities for investors in energy or at least what should we be keeping an eye at?

Jon Quast: Well, I think that nuclear power is big trend and I know that people have been hearing about it. I just think it’s going to be a lot of emphasis put there and even the emphasis that we put there isn’t going to be enough. You look at what OpenAI is reportedly wanting. They’re reportedly wanting 250 gigawatts of electricity by 2033, just for running their AI data centers. That’s just one company. President Trump earlier this year, signed an executive order to quadruple the country’s nuclear power. It will add basically 300 gigawatts of nuclear power. You look at that,250 is what OpenAI wants. We’re saying, we’ll add 300 gigawatts of nuclear power. Basically, they’ll take all of that.

Jason Moser: Doesn’t seem like a lot of wiggle room there, Jon.

Jon Quast: Exactly. Here’s the thing. The order is by 2050 to have that much extra power. President Trump is saying, we’re going to add 300 gigawatts. Give us 25 years. OpenAI is like, we need it now and so does every other company that’s doing what OpenAI is doing. I just think we’re going to have a heyday for nuclear, but even if we do, it’s still not going to be enough.

Travis Hoium: I want to put some numbers to this. The EIA, Energy Information Administration, which is a phenomenal source for energy information because they pull all the prices, all the capacity production, all that stuff. Between 2024 and 2028 in the US, there is a planned about 200 gigawatts of additions. About half of that, over half of that is solar, so an intermittent energy source. You have to consider that the capacity factor of solar, meaning the amount of time that it produces energy on an average day is about 20, 25% of the time. We’re not anywhere near hitting those numbers in what is planned, and power plants don’t go up. Even a solar plant, which can be built relatively quickly, you’re still talking many months, in some cases, years. All that said, Jason, where are you looking for opportunities today?

Jason Moser: It definitely feels like we’re going to need all we can get. It’s all hands on deck. I think the key is going to be focusing on every resource available. I think in regard to AI specifically and the capabilities that it’s driving, I think the overwhelming demand is going to be on those reliable or firm energy sources. The stuff that’s on 24/7 that’s easily distributable. Renewables are one thing. But I think for AI specific stuff, we’re going to be looking at nuclear, natural gas and hydro electric primarily. We saw Google earlier in the year made a deal to provide some early stage capital for elemental power to prepare some nuclear sites here in the US. I think those were those small modular reactors. The other thing to think about longer term and I’m talking about longer term, Travis, but think a decade out. There was an interview with Jeff Bezos this week that I was pretty, I was fascinated by because I actually could totally see this happening. He was talking about data centers in space. Essentially.

Travis Hoium: It sounds crazy.

Jason Moser: It sounds crazy. It does. It sounds like. But if you think about it, they’re already trying. They’re already in the process of trying to figure out how to make this work. Now, that solves two key problems. You get the limitless resource of solar up in space and you’ve solved your.

Travis Hoium: Suddenly, that becomes a base source of energy as opposed to variable.

Jason Moser: You solve your cooling problems as well. It knocks out you kill two birds with one stone, so to speak. I think that’s pretty interesting to think about just further out. Just keep an eye on that. I don’t think that’s high in the sky stuff. I think that’s actually pretty legit. Beyond that, I looked to other companies in the value chain that enable SMRT usage and monitoring. The company I’ve talked about before called Itron that does that. They help their customers safely and securely monitor that critical infrastructure and power and water. You can look beyond the providers and look to those value chain adders as well.

Travis Hoium: Do you think that the rise in electricity prices which again, is getting more attention this year, I’ve noticed it with my electricity bill Jason, is that a pending problem in the US because if AI is what’s raising the costs for the average person, seems like an issue.

Jason Moser: Consumers will not like it. I can guarantee you that. I mean, I noticed the power bill difference when the winter hits here in Northern Virginia, and it basically doubles. If we see things going beyond just your typical seasonality, I think that’s going to be a real problem.

Travis Hoium: Yeah, that’s something to keep an eye on because regulators do play a pretty big role in this, who’s gonna get the electricity? What are people paying? That’s not just an economics process, although the economics could help with justifying some of these investments too, something else to keep in mind is that, you know, energy costs are important, and if prices are going up, people are gonna put more money into the ground. When we come back, we’re going to see how well Jason and Jon know their history of investing you’re listening to Motley Fool money.

Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. I want to know how well Jason and Jon know their market history. I’m going to ask you guys a few questions and see who knows the answer. Jon, I’ll have you go first here. What was the date of the 1987 crash? As a bonus, how much did the Dow Jones Industrial average drop on that day?

Jon Quast: Oh, and I assume that you’re wanting more than the year 1987, yeah?

Travis Hoium: Yeah, I would like you can give me the day of the week. Any information is.

Jon Quast: Well, it was on a Monday.

Travis Hoium: What color was this Monday, Jon.

Jon Quast: Well, there we go. A very black Monday. I would think it’s in October, but I don’t remember.

Travis Hoium: Jason, do you know the date?

Jason Moser: I actually do know this one. It’s October 19th.

Travis Hoium: 1987 and how much did the Dow drop?

Jason Moser: Do we have a little wiggle room here? I know it was 20%. It was a little bit more than 20%, but I don’t think it was 25%. It was somewhere in the middle between 20 and 25%.

Travis Hoium: Oh, that’s good. Jon. Do you have an answer.

Jon Quast: I was going to say 12.

Travis Hoium: Okay, 22.6% drop for the Dow Jones Industrial average. But the other thing that’s interesting with that historically is the Dow was what really got all the attention back then. It was not the S&P 500. We don’t talk much about the Dow anymore, but it was those 30 stocks. That’s what was reported on the nightly news. That’s the numbers that everybody knew is, what was the Dow doing?

Jason Moser: Yeah, and it’s interesting to think about the difference between the Dow and the S&P. We talk about, they definitely tried to modernize the Dow to a degree. It’s a little bit more up to speed now. But there’s also that difference between the stock price weighted index, the Dow Jones.

Travis Hoium: Do you want to explain that? Because that is a really weird thing about the Dow.

Jason Moser: Yeah, essentially, I mean, you’re just looking at one index and the Dow where it’s basically measured by the value of the stock price itself.

Travis Hoium: The number, so if you have $100 stock, it has a 10X weighting of a stock that has a $10 stock.

Jason Moser: Whereas the S&P, it’s market capitalization weighted. You’re actually talking about how heavy the whole company is. Stock price can be a function of anything. I mean, stock splits and whatnot can change it. It is just interesting to see that difference there and how that ultimately plays out in the way those indices perform.

Travis Hoium: Yeah, and back then that was a big reason that a lot of stocks typically were kept with stock splits and things like that, between somewhere around $30 and $100 per share. We get 100, you would expect a stock split to come. We don’t really think about that anymore because we have fractional shares and all that kind. That stuff didn’t exist.

Jason Moser: Yeah, I think didn’t memory serves, I think when Apple joined the Dow and didn’t it actually split its stock in order to be able to facilitate that membership? I feel like that might have happened.

Travis Hoium: That is a historical question I do not have the answer to. Speaking of big tech though, and maybe I’m giving things away here, what was the most valuable company in the world on January 1st, 2000? Jason, I’ll have you go first here. This is .com bubo. Lots of options.

Jason Moser: There are a lot of options. Was it global crossing? I don’t know. Honestly, just I feel like that’s a Jon.

Jon Quast: I would guess Cisco.

Travis Hoium: That would have been my guess. Cisco was the most valuable company in the world for a short period of time, but that was in March of 2000 at the turn of the century to the millennium, it was Microsoft. That was really most valuable company in the world. Interesting, parallel to where we are today, Microsoft was the most valuable company in the world. That is still one of the most valuable companies in the world. But if you would have invested in Microsoft at the beginning of 2000 and held it for the next 15 years, you would have basically the same amount of money.

Jason Moser: I was going to say the Balmer years didn’t treat shareholders very well.

Travis Hoium: Yeah, and so there’s a couple of things. I mean, their business actually did fine during the 2000, but the end of the ’90s, early 2000s, the price that you were paying was extremely high, and so multiple compression, meaning the price to earnings multiple or the price to sales multiple was going down over that period of time. Instead of multiples being a tailwind, like they’ve been for a lot of stocks over the past couple of years, it was a headwind for Microsoft. Again, just something to think about as we think about the market today. Pets.com gets a lot of attention in the .com bubble. Do you know when pets.com IPOed, and what its highest market cap was before falling apart. Jon, I will have you go first. When was the IPO, and what’s the highest market cap?

Jon Quast: Oh, how should I know? I mean, you want more than the year.

Travis Hoium: Actually, you might not get the year.

Jon Quast: I know. I mean, I feel like this is a high bar. I’m gonna go with June 12th, 1995, and I’ll say peak valuation was 50 billion.

Travis Hoium: See, Jason, I’ll give you a guess here, but these numbers surprise me.

Jason Moser: Yeah, the IPO, I don’t know, so I’m just going to guess March 1997, valuation wise, I know given the valuations that we see today, you would want to say something like 50 billion or I get that. But I think actually it was really especially at that time. This was even big at that time. I think it was something like 450 million, $500 million.

Travis Hoium: Wow. You guys are both way off for the timing. Their IPO was February of 2000. Way later than I would have guessed. But, Jason, you’re almost exactly right. $400 million was their top market what I think is interesting about that is, that is the name that we all remember from the .com bubble. But it wasn’t all that big of a company.

Jason Moser: No. Well, I mean, at the time it was. I mean, consider.

Travis Hoium: But you’re looking at I think today’s prices, that would be still less than billion dollar.

Jon Quast: I literally 100 times more than that.

Jason Moser: They had obviously a very short lived campaign as a publicly traded company. But yeah, I mean, that was like the quintessential Internet stock. I mean, just advertising at the Yin Yang, found a clever brand with that little sock puppet puppy, and they were just selling stuff on the Internet, like, this is the way we do it and just making no money in the process. But it’s interesting how we gave Amazon so much leeway to build out that concept, and yet your pets.coms of the world just never really stood a chance.

Travis Hoium: The lesson that I take from that one because you’re right. Amazon has become, obviously a household name everywhere. But if you would have just waited. If you would have just said, I’m not going to invest. The Internet, I think, is a huge thing. But 1999 I’m just going to say, you know what? I’m going to let things play out a little bit and you just waited even till 2002, 2003, 2004, 2008, when you knew who the winners were, that was actually a great time to invest in even a company like Amazon.

Jason Moser: That’s a really good lesson.

Travis Hoium: This one’s fun. OpenAI has 800 million weekly active users. How many users did AOL have at its peak? Then I have a follow up, Jason. Users. How many subscribers? That’s the, basically households. We were sending disks around, in those days.

Jason Moser: That’s the thing, OpenAI, 800 million weekly some odd user, 20 million paying subscribers. They got to figure out a way to short that up. AOL, I have no idea. Households,125 million.

Travis Hoium: John?[laughs]

Jon Quast: Well, I want to change my answer now. I was going to go with eight million. Here’s why. You had other companies. You had Juno, you had NetZero. You had all those. The trend started, but then eventually we switched off of those things. I was going to say eight million.

Jason Moser: John, I could be spectacularly off.

Travis Hoium: John, you’re actually pretty close, 25 million was their peak. But here’s the follow up. When did AOL shut down its dial up service?

Jon Quast: I think I know this one. It was earlier this year.

Travis Hoium: Jason do you want to?

Jason Moser: I was going to say, you would think they did this 15 years ago. It just happened, like John said, very recently. I think sometime within the last year, they actually stopped the whole thing.

Travis Hoium: It was last week.

Jon Quast: I would love to know the guy who was still using it two weeks ago.

Travis Hoium: Who was shocked that their Internet was shut down.

Jason Moser: Not one person.

Travis Hoium: I got a couple of quick ones here. At its peak, how much was invested annually in the USTelecom buildout? The thing that I wanted to bring in here is we talk about the .com bubble bursting. But in the late ’90s, there was really two bubbles. There was the Internet bubble, so the companies that was a valuation bubble, and there was basically an investment bubble where telecoms were investing a lot of money in building out the fiber that Jason mentioned earlier. But what was the actual number that they were putting in the ground? This is just in the US. What is your guess, Jason? Annual number, annual peak.

Jason Moser: One hundred billion dollars.

Travis Hoium: John.

Jon Quast: Did you say million or billion?

Jason Moser: Billion.

Jon Quast: Man, I was going with 10 billion.

Jason Moser: Again, it could be spectacularly off.

Travis Hoium: Jason, you’re about right, 118 billion in 2000. I believe we’ve only passed that number in two years since then. Interesting that the telecom buildout was basically hockey stick growth rate, and then it just plateaued. The other one that we’re not going to get to that is a similar is Apple in 2007, sold 1.4 million iPhones. 2015, that got up to 231 million, and then essentially plateaued. The question, for all these businesses is, when do you hit that plateau? Because that’s when you could potentially run into problems. Here’s the one I wanted to end on quickly. From January 1st, 2000 to March 2000, how much did the QQQ NASDAQ-100 rise? Then my follow up is, how much did it fall over the next six months, John? How much did it go up in those first three months? How much did it go down in the next six?

Jon Quast: I’m going to guess for going up, I’m going to guess it went up 15% during those three months. Then I believe there was a 50% drawdown from there.

Travis Hoium: Jason?

Jason Moser: I was going to say 20% for the first one. Then for the next six months, from that point, I think it fell.

Travis Hoium: From March to September.

Jason Moser: March to September, I would say it fell probably a good 60%.

Travis Hoium: Up 18% in those first, a little less than three months. Then over the next six months, fell 71%. Up an escalator out of window is the way that we quit this. Well, hopefully that was good context for people because I think we can always learn from history whether things repeat or not, they typically rhyme. I think that’s how the saying goes. When we come back, we will get to the stocks that are on our radar. You’re listening to Motley Fool Money.

As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about and the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don’t buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. All personal finance content follows Motley Fool editorial standards and is not approved by advertisers. Advertisements are sponsored content and provided for informational purposes only. To see our full advertising disclosure, please check out our show notes. One company I want to bring into the discussion, we’ve high level, talked about history and AI. But Google had some interesting announcements. OpenAI is obviously getting all the attention, but Google Gemini Enterprise was announced this week. Jason, what did you take away from that?

Jason Moser: A few things, I think. I use both Gemini and ChatGPT interchangeably. Probably use Gemini a little bit more. I wasn’t terribly surprised to see the announcement because this is an arms race. I think it speaks to Google’s ability to respond to market forces and competition. I think, also the real advantage that it has, and it’s already massive user base and the powerful business model, not to mention just customer mind share. I think ChatGPT absolutely is doing a great job on customer mind share, but going back to earlier in the show, when we were talking about 800 million some odd weekly users, only 20 million really of those are subscribers. I think that is just a big hurdle for a company like ChatGPT to overcome. The reason why Google doesn’t have to worry about it so much is because they’ve got a business that’s funded by this powerful advertising model, not to mention it’s growing Cloud business, as well. Now, when you look at Google in this space, they’re a total package. What’s that? They call it a full stack player?

Travis Hoium: A few of the things they announced, it pulls Gemini into applications. This goes into GCP, Google Cloud Platform. That is actually a profitable business. I think that’s something, as investors, we should highlight. OpenAI is losing money. They’re not public yet, but this is a huge growth business for Google and for Alphabet, and it is now profitable, as well. I think the idea here is, this is going to be an enterprise play along with, hey, you know what? If Gemini as a consumer app wins great.

Jason Moser: Well, I think this shows a couple of things. This technology at its core is totally replicable. Basically, all they need is the resources and the time to be able to do it. I think the thing that’s not necessarily replicable is the power under the hood, so to speak, with what Google has built through the decades. ChatGPT is just not there yet. It’s not to say they can’t get there. Don’t get me wrong, but I’m just saying that it’s a much younger company that still has a lot to prove. From that perspective, again, I look at something like a Google today, and I think, wow, they’re doing a lot of really neat stuff. I think ChatGPT is doing a lot of really neat stuff, too. I think we’re going to see at some point, OpenAI is going to have to resort to some sort of an ad supported model in order to be able to continue generating that revenue, or they’re just going to have to come up with a way to grow that subscriber number, which is just so small today compared to what Google has just on an ongoing basis.

Travis Hoium: The 800 pound gorilla in the room that we always continue to overlook. Let’s get to this accident on our radar. John, I’m going to have you go first. What is on your radar this week?

Jon Quast: On my radar right now is a company called Rubrik that is ticker symbol RBRK. This is a small cybersecurity company. But what I like about this is that it’s not trying to prevent attacks. Its business model is assuming an attack has already taken place, and it’s going to get your business back up and running in a fraction of the time. You think about that. That’s really an interesting counter positioning, when it comes to maybe what your CrowdStrikes of the world are trying to do. That’s really interesting. It trades at about 15 times its sales. You look at its annual recurring revenue. It’s up 36%. That’s a good growth. Gross margin has jumped to about 80%. Those two things right there signal to me that I don’t think it looks terribly overvalued. It does generate positive free cash flow, despite being a young business. It has a net cash position. It’s adding new customers at a good pace. But with only 2,500 spending 100,000 a year, I think there’s plenty of room to grow that. Net dollar retention is over 120%, so its existing customers are spending more over time. I really like its co-founder and CEO, Bipul Sinha. He really values this mentality of basically innovate or cease to be a business. That could make things a little bit volatile, but I think it’s going to also potentially make it a key innovator here in the cybersecurity space. It’s definitely on my radar and one I’m watching.

Travis Hoium: Dan, what do you think about Rubrik?

Dan Caplinger: I do like the company, John, but I have a question about what they call themselves. They call themselves a zero trust data security and zero trust doesn’t exactly make me feel good.[laughs].

Jon Quast: That’s an unfortunate way to talk about it in the trade.

Travis Hoium: Jason, what is on your radar?

Jason Moser: Something we’ve been doing here on the website recently with the analyst team, it’s something we’re calling the Analyst Stream, and a couple of days a week, we’re taking a topic of the day and all just offering our spin on it. Today, Friday, we’ve got safety stock pitches for folks. A stock that I recently purchased from my own portfolio with safety in mind is Waste Management. Ticker is WM. As the old saying goes, your trash is my treasure, and we certainly produce a lot of trash here, but weights management, they own or operate the largest network of landfills in the US and Canada with 262 sites, making it the top dog. They also benefit from a growing recycling segment, renewable energy segment, and healthcare solutions business, too. Because you remember they just acquired Stericycle last year, I think, given the nature of the market there, trash is pretty reliable. I think holding onto this one for a decade or longer makes a lot of sense for investors.

Travis Hoium: Dan, what do you think about investing in garbage?

Dan Caplinger: Garbage isn’t going anywhere, gang. We’re not going to stop making it. It’s going to be something that we’re going to have to deal with forever.

Jason Moser: As the kids say, Dan, it true.

Travis Hoium: Dan, Rubrik or Waste Management, which one is going on your watches?

Dan Caplinger: Like I said, garbage ain’t going anywhere. We’re going to go Waste Management. I like that dividend, too.

Travis Hoium: We are out of time this week. Thank you for listening to Motley Fool Money. We’ll see you here tomorrow.

Retirement can be incredibly expensive, and with many Americans’ finances stretched thin right now, it can be tough to save anything at all for the future.

Investing in the stock market is one of the most effective ways to grow your savings, and you don’t need a lot of cash to get started. In fact, it’s possible to retire with $1 million or more with just $10 per day. Here’s how.

Building long-term wealth in the stock market

Investing doesn’t have to mean spending countless hours researching and building a portfolio full of individual stocks. Contributing to your 401(k) or IRA can be a more approachable way to invest, and you can earn far more with this strategy than stashing your spare cash in a savings account.

Image source: Getty Images.

While investing can seem daunting and risky, it’s safer than you might think. Mutual funds and index funds can carry less risk than many other types of investments, and depending on where you buy, they can also be more protected against market volatility.

Whether you’re investing in a 401(k), IRA, or other type of retirement account, consistency is key. These types of investments thrive over decades thanks to compound earnings, as you earn gains on your entire account balance rather than just the amount you’ve invested.

Over time, compound earnings can have a snowball effect on your savings. The more you earn on your investments, the greater your account balance will grow, and you’ll earn even more. By giving your money as much time as possible to build, you can accumulate $1 million or more while barely lifting a finger.

Turning $10 per day into $1 million or more

Exactly how much you can earn in the stock market will depend on where you invest, but historically, the market itself has earned an average rate of return of around 10% per year over the last 50 years.

That’s not to say you’ll necessarily earn 10% returns every single year. Some years, you’ll earn much higher-than-average returns — like in 2024, for example, when the S&P 500 earned total returns of more than 23%. Other years, though, you’ll earn lower or even negative returns. Over decades, those ups and downs have historically averaged out to roughly 10% per year.

Let’s say your investments are in line with the market’s long-term performance, earning returns of 10% per year, on average. If you were to invest $10 per day — or around $300 per month — here’s approximately how much you could accumulate over time.

Data source: Author’s calculations via investor.gov.

In this scenario, it would take just over 35 years to reach the $1 million mark. But if you have even a few extra years to invest or can afford to contribute more than $10 per day, you can earn exponentially more in total.

For example, say that you can afford to invest $15 per day, or roughly $450 per month. If you’re still earning an average annual return of 10%, those contributions would add up to more than $2.3 million after 40 years.

No matter how much you can contribute each day or month, getting started investing as early as possible is key. The more consistently you invest, the easier it will be to retire a millionaire.

What happened

Chesapeake Asset Management LLC disclosed a new position in Ryder System (R -0.12%), according to a quarterly report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 15, 2025 (SEC filing). The fund purchased 19,350 shares during the period, bringing the position’s value to approximately $3.08 million as of June 30, 2025. This trade represents an estimated 2.78% of the fund’s $110.74 million in U.S. equity holdings.

What else to know

This is a new position for the fund, representing 2.78% of 13F reportable assets under management following the trade.

Chesapeake’s top five fund holdings after the filing are:

• NASDAQ:MSFT: $11.41 million (10.0% of AUM) as of 2025-06-30
• NYSE:LLY: $6.94 million (6.2% of AUM) as of 2025-06-30
• NYSE:SPOT: $6.27 million (5.6% of AUM) as of 2025-06-30
• NASDAQ:AAPL: $5.99 million (5.4% of AUM) as of 2025-06-30
• NYSE:JPM: $5.52 million (5.0% of AUM) as of 2025-06-30

As of October 14, 2025, Ryder System shares were priced at $182.01, up 20.07% over the past year, outperforming the S&P 500 by 6.68 percentage points over the same period

Company Overview

Company Snapshot

Ryder System, Inc. is a leading provider of logistics and transportation solutions, operating globally with a diversified service portfolio. The company leverages its scale and expertise to deliver integrated fleet management and supply chain services to enterprise customers.

The company generates revenue through leasing and maintenance contracts, rental fees, logistics services, and the sale of used vehicles, offering integrated solutions to optimize clients’ transportation and supply chain operations.

IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

Ryder System provides fleet management, supply chain solutions, and dedicated transportation services, including full-service leasing, commercial vehicle rental, and logistics management.

It serves businesses across industries with large-scale transportation and logistics needs, targeting corporate clients seeking efficiency, reliability, and scalability in fleet and supply chain management.

Foolish take

Chesapeake Asset Management starting a new position in transportation giant Ryder System is noteworthy. The investment isn’t small; Ryder stock sits just outside the financial management company’s top five holdings at the number six position.

Ryder had a rough 2023 with sales down 2% year over year, but it undertook changes to its business, bouncing back strong in 2024 with 7% year-over-year revenue growth to $12.6 billion. However, sales results in 2025 have been mixed. Through the first half of this year, revenue of $6.3 billion was flat compared to 2024.

But that’s not the whole story. Ryder expects its free cash flow (FCF) for the year to reach between $900 million and $1 billion. This sum far outpaces the $133 million in FCF produced last year, and will allow it to continue paying its robust dividend.

Moreover, the company adopted cost-saving initiatives that helped it increase diluted earnings per share (EPS) by 11% year over year to $3.15 in the second quarter. That’s the third consecutive quarter of double-digit EPS growth.

Ryder’s transformation from its difficult 2023 is delivering benefits to shareholders through higher EPS and FCF even though topline sales have not been impressive in 2025. These factors probably contributed to Chesapeake’s decision to begin investing in Ryder, which looks like a solid stock to buy for income investors.

Glossary

13F reportable assets: Assets that investment managers must disclose quarterly to the SEC if they exceed $100 million in U.S. equity holdings.
Assets under management (AUM): The total market value of investments managed on behalf of clients by a fund or firm.
Position: The amount of a particular security or investment held by an investor or fund.
Stake: The ownership interest or share an investor holds in a company or asset.
Top five holdings: The five largest investments in a fund’s portfolio, usually by market value.
Outperforming: Achieving a higher return than a specific benchmark or index over a given period.
Dividend yield: A financial ratio showing how much a company pays in dividends each year relative to its share price.
Fleet management: Services that oversee and coordinate commercial vehicles for businesses, including maintenance, leasing, and logistics.
Supply chain solutions: Services that help businesses manage the flow of goods, information, and resources from suppliers to customers.
Full-service leasing: A leasing arrangement where the provider handles maintenance, repairs, and other services for the leased asset.
Logistics management: The planning and coordination of moving goods and resources efficiently through a supply chain.
TTM: The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.

The former Stolper Co is a financial management company that merged with another financial services business to form Wealth Oklahoma in 2025. It initiated a new position in Allison Transmission Holdings (ALSN -2.01%), acquiring 75,606 shares in the third quarter, an estimated $6.4 million trade based on the average price for Q3 2025, according to its October 10, 2025, SEC filing.

What happened

Wealth Oklahoma disclosed the purchase of 75,606 shares of Allison Transmission Holdings in its quarterly report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on October 10, 2025 (SEC filing). The new holding was valued at $6.4 million as of Q3 2025, with the transaction representing 1.9% of Stolper’s $330 million in reportable U.S. equity assets.

What else to know

This is a new position; the stake now accounts for 1.9% of Wealth Oklahoma’s 13F reportable assets as of September 30, 2025.

Top holdings after the filing are as follows:

• BRK-B: $18.96 million (5.75% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• JPM: $17.74 million (5.37% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• AAPL: $14.90 million (4.52% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• GOOGL: $11.92 million (3.6% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
• COF: $10.73 million (3.25% of AUM as of Q3 2025)

As of October 9, 2025, Allison Transmission shares were priced at $81.02, down 18.4% over the prior year ending October 9, 2025 and underperforming the S&P 500 by 33.9 percentage points over the past year.

The company reported trailing 12-month revenue of $3.2 billion for the period ended June 30, 2025 and net income of $762 million for the period ended June 30, 2025.

Allison Transmission’s dividend yield stood at 1.3% as of October 10, 2025. Shares were 35% below their 52-week high as of October 9, 2025.

Company Overview

Company Snapshot

Allison Transmission designs and manufactures fully automatic transmissions and related parts for commercial, defense, and specialty vehicles. It also offers remanufactured transmissions and aftermarket support.

The company generates revenue primarily through product sales to original equipment manufacturers and aftermarket services, including replacement parts and extended coverage.

Allison Transmission serves a global customer base of OEMs, distributors, dealers, and government agencies, with a focus on commercial vehicle and defense markets.

Image source: Getty Images.

Allison Transmission is a leading provider of fully automatic transmissions for medium- and heavy-duty commercial and defense vehicles worldwide. The company leverages a broad distribution network and long-standing OEM relationships to maintain a strong position in the auto parts sector.

Foolish take

Founded in 1915, Allison Transmission is a veteran of propulsion systems technology. It’s the world’s largest manufacturer of medium and heavy-duty fully automatic transmissions, according to the company.

Allison Transmission’s sales are down slightly year over year. Through the first half of 2025, revenue stood at $1.58 billion compared to $1.61 billion in 2024.

This lack of sales growth is a contributor to the company’s share price decline, adding to its dismal 2025 outlook, which it slashed due to softness in demand in some of its end markets, such as for medium-duty trucks. Allison Transmission now expects 2025 revenue to come in between $3.1 billion to $3.2 billion, down from $3.2 billion to $3.3 billion.

With Allison Transmission shares hovering around a 52-week low, Wealth Oklahoma took advantage to initiate a position in the stock. This speaks to Wealth Oklahoma’s belief that Allison Transmission can bounce back. This might be the case, given Allison’s recent acquisition of Dana Incorporated, which provides drivetrain and propulsion systems in over 25 countries.

With a price-to-earnings ratio of 9, Allison Transmission’s valuation looks attractive, which also explains Wealth Oklahoma’s purchase. The stock certainly looks like it’s in buy territory.

Glossary

13F reportable assets: U.S. equity holdings that institutional investment managers must disclose quarterly to the SEC on Form 13F.
AUM (Assets Under Management): The total market value of investments managed on behalf of clients by a financial institution or fund manager.
Dividend yield: Annual dividend payments divided by the share price, expressed as a percentage, showing income return on investment.
Trailing twelve months (TTM): The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.
Original equipment manufacturer (OEM): A company that produces parts or equipment that may be marketed by another manufacturer.
Aftermarket services: Products and support provided after the original sale, such as replacement parts, maintenance, or extended warranties.
Stake: The amount or percentage of ownership an investor or institution holds in a company.
Quarterly report: A financial statement filed every three months, detailing a company’s performance and financial position.
Distribution network: The system of intermediaries, such as dealers and distributors, through which a company sells its products.
Defense market: The sector focused on supplying products and services to military and government defense agencies.

Real estate investing can be a great way to make some passive income. You have lots of options, including purchasing a rental property, investing in a real estate partnership, or buying a real estate investment trust (REIT). Each one has its benefits and drawbacks.

REITs can be a great choice because they enable you to build a diversified real estate portfolio that produces lots of steady passive income. For example, you could collect nearly $250 of dividend income each month by investing $50,000 into these three top monthly dividend-paying REITs:

Data source: Google Finance and author’s calculations. Note: Dividend yield as of Oct. 1, 2025.

Another great thing about REITs is their accessibility — you don’t have to invest much to get started and can easily buy and sell shares in your brokerage account. So, don’t fret if you don’t have $50,000 to invest in REITs right now. You can start by investing a small amount each month and gradually build your passive income portfolio. Here’s why these REITs are excellent choices for those seeking to build passive income from real estate.

Realty Income

Realty Income has a simple mission: It aims to provide its investors with dependable monthly dividend income that steadily rises. The REIT has certainly delivered on its mission over the years.

The landlord has raised its monthly dividend payment 132 times since its public market listing in 1994. It has delivered 112 consecutive quarterly increases and raised its payment at least once each year for more than three decades, growing it at a 4.2% compound annual rate during that period.

Realty Income backs its high-yielding monthly dividend with a high-quality real estate portfolio. It owns retail, industrial, gaming, and other properties secured by long-term net leases with many of the world’s leading companies. Those leases provide it with very stable rental income, 75% of which it pays out in dividends. Realty Income retains the rest to invest in additional income-producing properties that grow its income and dividend.

Healthpeak Properties

Healthpeak Properties is new to paying monthly dividends, having switched from a quarterly schedule earlier this year. The REIT owns a diversified portfolio of healthcare-related properties, including medical office buildings, laboratories, and senior housing. It leases these properties to healthcare systems, biopharma companies, and physicians’ groups under long-term leases that feature annual escalation clauses.

The healthcare REIT had maintained its dividend payment at a steady rate over the past few years, allowing its growing rental income to steadily reduce its dividend payout ratio, which is now down to 75%. With its financial profile now healthier, Healthpeak has begun increasing its dividend, providing its investors with a 2% raise earlier this year.

Healthpeak should be able to continue growing its dividend in the future. Rental escalation clauses should boost its income by around 3% per year. Meanwhile, the REIT has growing financial flexibility to invest in additional income-producing healthcare properties.

EPR Properties

EPR Properties invests in experiential real estate, including movie theaters, eat-and-play venues, wellness properties, and attractions. It leases these properties back to operating companies, primarily under long-term net leases.

The REIT pays out around 70% of its cash flow in dividends each year, retaining the rest to invest in additional income-producing experiential properties. It currently plans to invest between $200 million and $300 million each year. It acquires properties and invests in experiential build-to-suit development and redevelopment projects. EPR has already committed to investing $109 million into projects it expects to fund over the next 18 months.

This investment range can support a low- to mid-single-digit annual growth rate in its cash flow per share. That should support a similar growth rate in its dividend payment. EPR is on track to grow its cash flow per share by around 4.3% this year and has already increased its monthly dividend payment by 3.5% this year.

Ideal REITs to own for passive income

If you want to start building passive income, consider adding Realty Income, Healthpeak Properties, and EPR Properties to your portfolio. Their growing real estate assets and history of steadily rising monthly dividends make them compelling options for anyone seeking dependable and increasing passive income. Investing in these REITs can help you take the first step toward securing your financial future.

So far this year, NuScale Power (SMR 0.66%) stock has more than tripled in value. The reason: rapidly rising interest in small-scale nuclear power. NuScale is arguably the leading developer of small modular reactors, with a quantifiable first-mover advantage. This lead could provide it with a decades-long runway of growth, fueled by another rapidly growing industry: artificial intelligence.

Small-scale nuclear is closer to reality than many think

Proponents of nuclear power as a scalable, renewable, low-carbon source of power have been repeatedly stymied by global events that have hindered nuclear power expansion. From reactor meltdowns to sudden tsunamis, public opinion has shifted heavily due to numerous public failures of nuclear technology. Public outcry and safety concerns caused regulatory scrutiny to soar across many parts of the world, leading to huge cost overruns and engineering delays for many major nuclear projects.

The tides have turned yet again in recent years due to soaring energy demand from sectors like artificial intelligence — a sector that is requiring ever higher amounts of energy to thrive and survive. Big tech, for example, is deploying billions of dollars into restarting old nuclear facilities, as well as building several new facilities across the U.S. According to the Harvard Business Review, big tech has gone “all in” on nuclear.

These projects could take many years to come to fruition, and only deep-pocketed entities like Big Tech can afford to see them through. That’s partially why there’s so much hype around small modular reactors: a newer generation of nuclear reactors that can be built in a factory off-site and delivered anywhere in the world. That’s a huge advantage for power-hungry data centers located in cold, remote areas of the world — an advantage for reducing cooling costs, but a problem when it comes to sourcing large amounts of reliable local energy.

Small-scale nuclear has been a dream for decades. But the reality of small-scale nuclear may finally be upon us. NuScale has the first and only SMR certified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for commercial production. Management believes the company’s first order is just months away.

Image source: Getty Images.

NuScale Power is the obvious choice for nuclear investors

In 2023, the NRC certified the first-ever SMR for commercial production: NuScale’s 50 MW model. Earlier this year, however, the company was able to gain certification for a larger 77 MW model. NuScale management thinks that its first order could be made official by this December — less than 90 days from now. The company already has a dozen reactors under construction. This would allow it to fulfill one or two initial orders, given that the company expects customers to combine six to 12 modules into each operating facility.

To be sure, competition exists. But none have gained certifications from the NRC. Some companies, like Oklo, have begun the application process, but NuScale is safely one to three years ahead of the competition in this regard. That lead is especially true when considering that NuScale has already lined up nearly all of the necessary materials and outsourcing partners to begin fulfilling orders. NuScale management believes they could handle up to 20 orders per year as demand materializes.

Investors should be cautious regarding the timelines here. Even if NuScale receives an order in 2025, construction of the project wouldn’t be completed until 2030 at the earliest. NuScale would, of course, receive revenue before that date. But there may not be a fully functioning, real-world use case of SMRs for another five years, a reality that may keep demand low in the meantime.

Still, NuScale is an exciting growth company that has a healthy lead on the competition. With a market cap of just $10 billion, the stock looks like a reasonable bet for patient investors, even after the strong run-up.

In this podcast, we’ve got a 5-minute listen from Chapter 3 of David Gardner’s latest Rule Breaker Investing book. In “After Yesterday,” David tells the CNBC story of a co-host stunned that he still liked cloud stocks and why Rule Breaker investors don’t let yesterday’s tape write tomorrow’s script. Enjoy the excerpt, then share it with a friend who could use a smarter, happier, and richer mindset.

To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool’s free podcasts, check out our podcast center. When you’re ready to invest, check out this top 10 list of stocks to buy.

A full transcript is below.

This podcast was recorded on Sept. 13, 2025.

David Gardner: Hey, Fools. Happy weekend. David here with a quick Rule Breaker investing Weekend Extra. I’ve got something special for you today. It’s a five minute listen in from the Rule Breaker Investing audio book, which arrives just days away September 16, alongside the hardcover and the eBook versions. Now, if you’re an audible fan or you just like hearing ideas rather than reading them, this is your sneak peek, or listen. A quick word on what you’re about to hear. This excerpt captures the spirit of my book, practical, optimistic, maybe a little mischievous, equal parts, habits, stock picking traits, and portfolio principles, all in service of making us smarter, happier, and richer. This is the start of Chapter 3. It’s in my own voice, of course, with a few points you may recognize as a regular listener of this podcast and a story you probably haven’t heard yet. If you enjoy it, you can pre order wherever you get your books and audio books. Here’s a pro tip. Pre orders helps signal to the world that investors still read and listen. If someone in your life could use a friendly on ramp to investing, and send them this episode, consider it the audio appetizer before the main course lands on September 16. Enough for me. Let’s queue it up, producer Bart Shannon, five minutes from the Rule Breaker Investing Audio Book. I hope it entertains here on your weekend as a Weekend Extra, and I hope this audio book, pays for itself many times over in the years to come. Let’s get started. Fool on.

You still like Cloud computing stocks? The host queried me during the commercial break. After yesterday, I was co hosting the early morning CNBC market Show with a smart young anchor. Our perspectives couldn’t have been further apart. During the first commercial break, I’d mentioned several of my favorite stocks like Salesforce, and her jaw dropped. The Cloud computing sector had sold off 7-10% the day before. You still like cloud computing stocks after yesterday? My co host, we shall call her after yesterday, wasn’t a day trader or a high frequency trading supercomputer. This was a well educated, successful broadcast journalist who got up at dawn to cover the markets. People tuned in to her to learn the days ins and outs of business and market developments. Except maybe in a sense, she was a day trader. Anyone who follows the markets for a living and makes other people feel like rubes for still liking a stock after yesterday would seem to be day trading the headlines, trends, and buzz, even if not day trading the stock market. If you follow something minute by minute, every zig zag, pass, shot, or tackle becomes noteworthy. You magnify it, and heck, after yesterday isn’t being paid for her financial advice, she’s great at what she does. Anchoring live TV at any hour of the day is a demanding job. Just don’t confuse her perspective with financial expertise or let it guide your money. I’d guess some people watching CNBC think the opposite. In most aspects of life, I’d bet after yesterday is well mannered and exemplary. It’s only with the stock market that she thinks and likely acts contrary to her and your best outcomes, ironic and crazy. If you ever wonder how common capital F Fools like you and me can outperform Wall Street and its indices, you now know your answer.

The surest way to beat the market over time involves maintaining the same equanimity and perspective with your money that you do in other aspects of your life. Maybe Billy Joel crooned the greatest investment secret of all, don’t go changing. In other words, buy stocks to keep them, not trade them. You’ll do so much better if you invest for at least three years. If your absolute minimum holding period is less than three years, you’re doing it wrong. We often misunderstand what invest means and what investing looks like. The Latin root for invest is investire, meaning to put on the clothes, wear the garments. Think of a related phrase like priestly vestments. Picture fans wearing the jerseys of their favorite teams. As they walk to the stadium, find the way to their seats, cheer their team on, they are sporting the home team colors. And whether their team wins or loses, they keep that jersey on. Whether their team has a good or bad season, they keep that jersey on. Why? Because they’re deeply invested. Ironically, many may be more invested in their sports teams than in something of far more value the financial investments they make. Sports fans know their team is not going to win every game or year. Rule Breaker investors know the same of our stocks. If you find a great team, stick with it. Putting on the clothes can be literal. People wear shirts with an Apple logo, love their Lululemon’s, have Harley tattooed on their shoulder. These are not the same people. You likely have logo garments in your wardrobe. My wishes for you are A, that you own those stocks, and B, that those investments will outlast your clothes. Whether or not you have the shirt yet, I want you to love the companies you’re invested in. My portfolio includes enterprises that I believe do good things in this world, are purpose driven, manage for the long term, show resilience, exhibit optionality. I believe their success leads to a better world. When you’re actually invested like this, it’s natural, even in hard times to keep that jersey on. If people treated financial investments like their lifelong emotional investments in their sports teams, they’d be smarter, happier, and richer.

There’s certainly no shortage of hype surrounding relatively new stock Figma (FIG -4.22%) these days. And understandably so. This seemingly simple company is growing like crazy, recently reporting a year-over-year quarterly top line of improvement of 41%, with more of the same on the horizon.

Unfortunately, hype alone doesn’t guarantee bullishness. This stock’s down by more than half of its early August post-IPO surge high, in fact, with much of that setback in response to what seemed like healthy Q2 numbers posted this past week.

Still, many investors insist this weakness is an opportunity rather than an omen, and are using the pullback to step into a position they expect to ultimately soar. Are they right? Could a $10,000 investment in this young ticker turn into a million dollars or more in the foreseeable future?

First things first.

What is Figma anyway?

What’s Figma? The correct answer to the question seems too simple to be true. Yet, it is. Figma is an online collaboration platform that allows multiple members of the same team to co-create and edit visual user interfaces for mobile apps and websites. That’s it. That’s all it does.

OK, this description arguably understates the power of the technological tool. Figma’s cloud-based software helps users build the look of an interactive app or web page from the ground up, change it as often as needed, and facilitate communication between a team’s members as any updates are made. And, though it’s meant for non-coders and non-engineers, a feature called Dev Mode (“dev” being short for “developer”) can easily turn a layout into the computer code needed to make it work in the real world. Figma also offers digital whiteboards and slideshow presentation templates.

By and large, though, the company’s core competency is simply helping organizations easily build what their customers see when using that organization’s app or website.

The thing is, there’s a clear and growing demand for such a solution. Figma’s recently reported Q2 top line grew 41% year over year to nearly $250 million. The company’s guidance calls for comparable growth through the rest of the year, too, with the bulk of its mostly recurring revenue coming from existing customers simply adding more features or users to their subscription. Figma’s also reliably profitable (albeit only marginally, for now) despite its small size and fairly young age.

And yet, Figma’s stock tumbled again in response to Wednesday’s second-quarter results. While it was only a wild guess as to how much the company should have reported in profits for the three-month stretch, what was essentially a breakeven clearly wasn’t good enough for most investors.

Or maybe that wasn’t the reason for the setback at all.

Nothing’s ever unusual in the wake of an IPO

It’s a frustrating truth — but it takes a while for newly minted stocks to shake off all of their post-public-offering volatility. It’s also worth detailing that even the stocks that do end up soaring in the long run often suffer major — and sometimes prolonged — sell-offs first.

Case in point: Meta, when it was still called Facebook. It was all the rage before and shortly after its May 2012 IPO. Three months later, however, it had nearly been halved from the price of its first trade as a publicly traded issue. It wouldn’t reclaim that price again until more than a year later.

Rival social networking outfit Snap (parent to Snapchat) ran its shareholders through a similar wringer that still hasn’t run its complete course yet. Although this stock was red-hot following its late-2020 public offering all the way through October of 2021, shares then began what would turn into a sell-off of more than 80% in less than a year, leaving the stock well below its first trade’s price. It’s still roughly at that depressed price today, in fact.

It’s not all bad news, though. Artificial intelligence data center support provider Coreweave got a bit of a wobbly start following its March public offering, but finally found its footing in April and is still much higher than it was then, despite a more recent lull.

But what’s this got to do with Figma? It’s a reminder that the market doesn’t really know how to price — or even what to do with — newly created stocks. Investors innately understand that stocks are usually volatile after their initial public offering. Investors also know, however, that in many cases things end up paying off anyway, even if that ticker’s fundamental argument doesn’t hold much water yet.

In other words, there’s really no way of telling when, where, or even if Figma shares will recover. It’s got more to do with feelings and investors’ perceptions, which are fickle and impossible to predict. It could be months, if not years, before this ticker actually reflects the underlying company’s prospects.

Data source: SimplyWallSt.com. Chart by author.

Or the company may run into a headwind before the stock even gets a chance to do so.

One gaping vulnerability too big to ignore

But the question remains: Could investing $10,000 in Figma today make you a millionaire at any reasonable point in your lifetime? After all, clearly, there’s a growing demand for the interface design collaboration software it provides.

Never say never. But, probably not — just not for the reason you might think, like the stock’s outrageous valuation of nearly 30 times its sales. Not just earnings, but sales, versus the software’s industrywide average price to sales ratio of about 10.

Putting the sheer difficulty of trading stocks with recent IPOs aside for a moment, Figma’s got a much bigger problem. That is, there’s no real moat to speak of here. That just means there’s little to nothing to prevent a bigger and deeper-pocketed rival from seeing the success that Figma is enjoying with its platform and replicating the idea for itself. There’s certainly nothing legally preventing it from happening, anyway. While processes, machinery designs, or new creations can all be patented, a mere premise or a business idea isn’t protected in this way.

Image source: Getty Images.

And don’t think for a minute that would-be competitors aren’t already at least thinking about it, either, particularly now that Figma has proven this business is profitable, as well as highly marketable. Marketing and graphics software outfit Adobe already made an acquisition offer to Figma, in fact. While it ultimately ran into too many regulatory hurdles to be feasible, the fact that Adobe was willing to pay such a premium for Figma all the way back in 2023 underscores its confidence in the marketability of Figma’s technology.

If not Adobe, perhaps Microsoft might find a way of adding this sort of interface-design platform to its lineup of cloud-based productivity and team-collaboration tools. Odds are good that at least most of Figma’s paying customers are already familiar with and using one or two Microsoft-made products anyway.

You get the idea. It wouldn’t take much to launch a viable alternative to Figma. If another player wasn’t interested before, they’re certainly more likely to be interested now in the wake of well-publicized growth for its simple business.

Bottom line? Buy it if you must. Just know what it is you’re buying. You’re not investing in a growth business with proven staying power — at least not yet. You’re betting that the market is going to change its mind about this stock in the very foreseeable future. And that’s a pretty risky proposition.

Warren Buffett turned Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A 0.66%) (BRK.B 0.63%) into a trillion-dollar company primarily by investing in stocks. “That preference won’t change,” Buffett wrote in his most recent letter to shareholders.

But Buffett has been challenged by the current market to find great value in equities. He’s sold more stocks from Berkshire’s publicly traded portfolio than he bought every quarter for nearly three straight years. As valuations continue to climb higher, there’s more reason to sell Berkshire’s biggest holdings, and fewer reasons to buy new positions with the proceeds and the company’s operating cash flow. As a result, Buffett’s seen his company’s cash position balloon to $344 billion as of the end of June.

Despite the difficult market, Buffett did find a few opportunities last quarter. Berkshire bought $3.9 billion worth of equities, including 10 publicly traded stocks disclosed in its quarterly 13F filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Here are all 10 of Buffett’s recent buys, including the one that looks like the best opportunity for investors right now.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

Buffett’s buy list

Berkshire Hathaway filed form 13F with the SEC on Aug. 14, revealing all of the moves Buffett and his fellow portfolio managers made during the second quarter. The filing also included an amendment to the company’s first-quarter 13F, which detailed previously undisclosed purchases.

All told, Berkshire established or added to 10 of its positions last quarter:

• UnitedHealth (UNH 2.48%)
• Nucor (NUE -0.71%)
• Lennar (LEN 0.01%) (LEN.B)
• Constellation Brands (STZ 1.79%)
• Pool Corp
• Lamar Advertising
• Allegion
• Heico
• Chevron
• Dominos Pizza

The amended filing also disclosed that Berkshire established a new position in homebuilder D.R. Horton (NYSE: DHI) in the first quarter, but trimmed back shares slightly in the second quarter.

There are a lot of great investment candidates among the new purchases in Berkshire Hathaway’s portfolio.

The new position in UnitedHealth comes at a time when the stock has been beaten down by a series of poor financial results and declining consumer sentiment. It’s facing an investigation into potential Medicare Advantage fraud, which could result in billions in revenue clawbacks and penalties. At the same time, medical costs and utilization have increased, weighing on its profitability. The stock looks like a classic “be greedy when others are fearful” purchase from Buffett.

Nucor is another interesting investment, as many see it as a stealth artificial intelligence stock. As a leading U.S. steel supplier, the company is well-positioned to capitalize on new data center construction across the country. And with President Donald Trump imposing a 50% tariff on steel imports, it could benefit Nucor’s pricing. Costs have weighed on Nucor recently, but less competition from foreign suppliers could open the door for bigger profits going forward, especially as demand increases with data center buildouts.

Homebuilders Lennar and D.R. Horton have been pressured by the current market. High home prices combined with high interest rates have led to a drop in buying activity, forcing them to offer incentives to buyers like buying down their mortgage rates. That’s weighed on both revenue and profit margins, which in turn has weighed on their stock prices. But the housing shortage isn’t going away, and that could make right now an opportunity to buy one of the homebuilders.

But another stock on Buffett’s buy list looks like an even better value than the rest, and it’s no wonder he’s been buying shares for three straight quarters.

The best of the bunch

Warren Buffett loves a company with a wide moat. And one of the companies with extremely strong competitive advantages on Buffett’s buy list is Constellation Brands.

The company owns the exclusive distribution rights to many of the most popular Mexican beer brands, including Modelo and Corona. It’s worked to expand its portfolio and build strong distribution relations that have led it to gain market share over the last decade. It’s now the second biggest beer vendor in the United States, dominating the premium import category.

Despite headwinds for the beer industry, Constellation continued to gain market share last quarter. Management said the beer business captured 0.6 points of dollar sales share. That growth was supported by expanding distribution and continuing to spend on strategic marketing to expand its customer base to more non-Hispanic drinkers. That positions it well to capitalize when consumer spending turns around.

Constellation’s wine and spirits business has been a drag on its results, though. To that end, management divested its low-end brands in the segment in June, and it now operates a leaner portfolio of premium brands. Still, management expects the segment to weigh on profits for some time as it resizes the operations.

Importantly, Constellation generates significant free cash flow, with expectations for $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion this year. It should be able to consistently generate that level of cash flow every year with steady sales growth and minimal capital expenditure needs. That supports its share repurchase program and quarterly dividend. Management bought back $306 million worth of shares last quarter while returning an additional $182 million through its dividend.

The stock price has dropped since Buffett’s initial purchase at the end of last year. With the pressure on the beer industry, the stock price has remained low, and shares now trade for less than 13 times forward earnings estimates. Despite the slow growth of the business, it’s well-positioned to continue making steady gains and outperforming its peers. Combined with share repurchases, it should be able to generate respectable earnings-per-share growth. That makes its current valuation very attractive, especially for investors who like to follow Buffett’s value investing style.

At one point, I owned seven rental properties. Today, I’m down to just one (and I’m getting ready to sell it soon).

No more tenants, no more maintenance calls, and no more juggling spreadsheets and 5,000 receipts at tax time… I’m moving all my money into one low-cost index fund strategy that’s easier to manage and way less stressful.

I’m not saying real estate isn’t a good wealth-building tool. It’s worked out well for me.

But I learned (the hard way) that passive income isn’t always passive. Here’s the backstory and my plans moving forward.

What drew me to real estate in the first place

Fresh out of high school, I was eager to build a real estate empire.

My original plan was to buy 10 solid rental properties, each cash flowing around $1,000 per month. That would give me a cool $10,000 per month in income — enough to retire early and live life on my terms.

And honestly, as vague as that plan was, it made a lot of sense at the time.

I worked hard to save up down payments, slowly bought properties, and actually enjoyed the process (mostly).

Not every property I bought was a slam dunk. But I definitely found and experienced many of the benefits I was chasing. I built equity, earned decent cashflow, and took advantage of real estate tax perks.

But eventually, the cracks started to show.

The downside nobody warns you about

If you’ve ever owned rentals, you know: the spreadsheets don’t tell the full ownership story.

They don’t show leaks under the kitchen sink. Or the three-month turnover delay because your contractors ghosted you. Or the multiple tenants who stopped paying right after moving in.

Some properties ran fine for many years. Then in a single 12-month period all of the profits would get wiped out by a perfect storm of emergencies.

True story — I had this one rental that was amazing for three years straight. I always got paid on time, and never heard a peep from the tenant… Then one day out of the blue I got a phone call from a lawyer. Turns out my tenant was a “lady of the night,” using my apartment as a place of business for illegal services.

Property managers helped me manage everything. But they are costly. And at the end of the day, the responsibility always falls on the owner.

With each place I bought, my stress grew. Even when things were going well, there was always a low-grade sense of stress in the background.

My new strategy: Index funds

I made it up to seven rentals, then I decided maybe I was climbing a ladder I didn’t want to be at the top of.

So I’ve been slowly exiting real estate ever since — selling one place at a time. I began with the trouble-maker properties first, keeping the higher performers longer. And now I’m down to just one single property left.

In my early 30s, I stumbled into index investing. It was something I hadn’t taken seriously before. I’d always known what index funds were (wide market exposure, low fees, blah blah blah). But I didn’t realize how freeing they could feel until I actually tried it.

I’ve now moved most of my money into a total stock market index fund. And it’s been one of the best financial decisions I’ve made.

I use Fidelity as my main broker. And I’ve been with them for over a decade now. Between my personal accounts, retirement funds, and custodial accounts for my kid and nephews, I’ve got 11 accounts with Fidelity… and I pay $0 in fees. Read my full gushing review of Fidelity here, all about why I’m a big fan.

Passive income that’s actually passive

I now keep most of my investments in total market index funds like FZROX (Fidelity ZERO Total Market Index Fund) and VTI (Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF).

These funds own thousands of companies across nearly every sector. I don’t pick individual stocks or worry about trying to outperform. Average returns are fine with me.

And the best part is, I don’t have to manage anything. It’s truly passive.

Here’s why I’m a big believer in index funds:

• Built in diversification — I’m invested across all industries, and own pieces of all the big and small publicly traded companies out there.
• Liquidity when I need it — I can sell just a small slice of my index funds at any time, unlike real estate where I’d have to offload an entire property just to access cash.
• Low fees — FZROX literally has a 0.00% expense ratio, so I love that fund. But most index funds have a tiny expense ratio compared to managed funds. Also most brokers have no trade fees when you buy or sell.
• Hands-off — The only thing I have to do is not mess with it.
• Strong historical returns — Large index funds like the S&P 500 have averaged ~10% annually over their long history.
• Mental clarity — I don’t get wrapped up in the headlines or have to think about my investments daily.

Even during the COVID-19 pandemic when my index funds were down 30%-40%, I was actually stressing about my rental properties more than I was about the stock market.

Thankfully, both rebounded after 2020. But that experience reinforced something big:

I’d rather hold an asset that can drop 40% without me having to lift a finger, than one that drops 10% and demands all my attention (or seven that demand attention).

Onwards and upwards

Seven rentals taught me a lot. But once I shifted my mindset away from “owning stuff” and toward growing wealth simply, index funds just made more sense.

I’ve reclaimed my time, simplified my financial life, and stopped managing my investments — and finally started enjoying what they’re doing for me.

It’s not too late to switch strategies, simplify your approach, or start fresh. Index funds are a great place to begin.

Check out our favorite online brokers and trading platforms for index investing (and more) — with low fees, no account minimums, and no stress.

Campaigners hoping to convert a disused railway line into England’s longest cycle and pedestrian tunnel are challenging a government decision to fill much of the historic structure with concrete.

Earlier this month ministers decided to award several million pounds to permanently shutter the Queensbury tunnel built in the 1870s for a railway between Halifax and Keighley in West Yorkshire, despite spending £7.2m to shore up the structure less than four years ago.

The government has agreed to fund plans to infill the tunnel for safety reasons, by the roads agency, National Highways (NH), which is responsible for maintaining the historic railways estate.

The decision comes after the agency was widely criticised for “cultural vandalism” over the infilling of Victorian bridges on the railway estate. In 2023 it was forced to reverse burying in concrete a Victorian bridge in Great Musgrave, Cumbria, on the route of a scheme to join two heritage railway lines.

The mayor of West Yorkshire, Tracy Brabin, who backed calls to reopen the 1.4-mile tunnel which was closed to railway in 1956, has expressed disappointment at the government’s decision. In 2021, while standing at the entrance of the tunnel, she described plans for a subterranean cycle path linking Bradford and Keighley to Halifax as a “great facility for our community.”

Campaigners accused the government of “investing in destruction” and ignoring the views of 8,000 planning objections to the plan to infill the tunnel. They are due to meet Lilian Greenwood, the minister for the future of roads, next week to urge her to reverse the decision.

In a letter to campaigners, Greenwood said converting the tunnel for cycling would be too costly in “the challenging fiscal environment” and that “safety risks need to be addressed.”

NH’s contractors estimate it would cost £26.4m to convert the tunnel. But campaigners have dismissed this figure as “gold-plated” and claim the tunnel could be brought back into use as a greenway for only £13.7m – not much more than the £7.2m spent to shore it up from 2018 to 2021 including at least £3.3m now required to infill the structure.

They also point to a study by the charity Sustrans published earlier this year which found the proposed route would generate £3 in social, economic and tourism benefits for every £1 spent on it.

Norah McWilliam, the leader of the Queensbury Tunnel Society, said: “The government is making and investment in destruction to satisfy the needs of a roads body that only cares about its own narrow interests. Community aspirations to bring positive benefits from our fabulous historic asset mean nothing to these spreadsheet shufflers.”

She added: “These new millions and the seven lost in a black hole four years ago could have paid for the tunnel’s repair, safeguarding it for a role at the heart of an inspiring and sustainable active travel network – something Bradford and West Yorkshire could be proud of.”

Graeme Bickerdike, the engineering coordinator for the society, said: “The minister claims that her decision is based on a ‘full view of the facts’, but the evidence seems to have come exclusively from National Highways which has a proven track record for exaggerating risk, misrepresenting condition evidence and frittering away public funds.

“There is no justification for another costly tunnel intervention at this time as the 2018-21 works have reduced what was already a low risk profile.”

Brabin said she shared the disappointment of campaigners, but said she understood the government’s decision. She said: “To ensure everyone’s safety the government had to act quickly to secure the site, and the realities of public finances meant a difficult decision needed to be made.

“We remain committed to helping support alternative routes for walking, wheeling and cycling between Bradford and Calderdale.”

The Mediterranean archipelago of Malta has long captivated British investors, and its allure extends beyond its sun-drenched beaches and rich history. For those seeking to diversify their portfolios or find a new place to call home, investing in Maltese property offers a unique blend of lifestyle benefits and financial potential. The island nation’s robust economy, EU membership, and attractive residency programmes further enhance its appeal as a prime destination for property investment.

Why Choose Malta?

Malta’s property market has demonstrated remarkable resilience and consistent growth, even amidst global economic fluctuations. Several factors contribute to this stability. The country’s strategic location in the heart of the Mediterranean, coupled with a favourable business climate, attracts international investors and expatriates, fuelling demand for housing. Furthermore, Malta’s EU membership provides a secure legal framework and facilitates ease of movement and trade for EU citizens.

The Maltese government actively encourages foreign investment through various initiatives, including attractive residency and citizenship by investment programmes. These schemes often involve property acquisition, providing a pathway to residency or citizenship for eligible investors and their families. Beyond the financial incentives, Malta offers an exceptional quality of life, characterised by a warm Mediterranean climate, a rich cultural heritage, a vibrant social scene, and excellent connectivity to major European cities. The widespread use of English as an official language also makes it an easy transition for UK investors.

The Maltese Property Market

The Maltese property market is diverse, offering a wide range of options to suit various tastes and budgets. From modern apartments and penthouses in bustling urban centres to charming townhouses in historic villages and luxurious villas with sea views, there is something for every investor. The market has seen steady appreciation in property values over the years, driven by limited land availability and growing demand from both local and international buyers.

Rental yields in Malta are also attractive, typically ranging from 4% to 7%, depending on the location and type of property. Prime areas like Sliema, St. Julian’s, and the capital city, Valletta, are particularly popular for rental investments due to high demand from expatriates working in Malta’s thriving finance, gaming, and technology sectors, as well as tourists. The demand for high-quality, luxury villas and high-end apartments remains particularly strong.

Popular Areas for Investment

Certain areas in Malta are particularly sought-after by property investors:

• Sliema and St. Julian’s: These coastal towns are Malta’s main commercial and entertainment hubs, offering a cosmopolitan lifestyle with numerous shops, restaurants, and bars. They are prime locations for luxury apartments and penthouses with high rental demand.
• Valletta: The historic capital city, a UNESCO World Heritage site, boasts unique character properties and a strong rental market driven by tourism and business.
• Swieqi and Pembroke: Residential areas popular with families and expatriates, offering a mix of apartments, maisonettes, and villas, close to St. Julian’s.
• Mellieħa and St. Paul’s Bay: Located in the north, these areas are popular for their beaches and more relaxed pace, attracting both holidaymakers and long-term residents.
• Gozo: Malta’s sister island offers a more tranquil and rural lifestyle, with generally lower property prices, appealing to those seeking peace and quiet.
• Special Designated Areas (SDAs): Locations like Portomaso in St. Julian’s, Tigné Point in Sliema, and Fort Cambridge in Sliema allow foreigners to purchase property with fewer restrictions and are often high-end developments.

Investors Looking for Citizenship

For UK investors seeking EU citizenship, Malta’s Exceptional Investor Naturalisation (MEIN) programme offers a path via significant economic contribution. Managed by the Community Malta Agency, it requires a substantial non-refundable government investment (€600k or €750k depending on residency duration), plus €50k per dependent. Applicants must also invest in property (purchase from €700k or rent from €16k annually) held for five years, and make a €10k philanthropic donation. A 12 or 36-month residency period and thorough due diligence are mandatory. Successful applicants gain Maltese (EU) citizenship.

Future Outlook

The outlook for the Maltese property market remains positive. Projections indicate continued growth in property values, supported by a robust economy, ongoing foreign investment, and sustained demand from both local and international buyers. The government’s focus on urban regeneration projects and the increasing importance of sustainable and eco-friendly developments are also shaping the future of the market. While challenges such as affordability for some locals and potential overdevelopment in certain areas exist, the overall sentiment is one of cautious optimism.

Investing in Maltese property can be a rewarding venture, offering the potential for capital appreciation, attractive rental income, and an enviable Mediterranean lifestyle. However, as with any investment, thorough research, due diligence, and professional advice are paramount to making informed decisions.