The Californian financial regulator has taken possession of First Republic, resulting in the third failure of an American bank since March, after a last-ditch effort to persuade rival lenders to keep the ailing bank afloat failed.

JPMorgan Chase Bank will assume all deposits, including uninsured deposits, and “substantially all assets” of the bank, according to a release early Monday.

The California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation said it had taken possession of the bank and appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation receiver of the bank. The FDIC accepted JPMorgan’s bid for the bank’s assets.

Since the sudden collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in March, attention has focused on First Republic as the weakest link in the U.S. banking system. Like SVB, which catered to the tech startup community, First Republic was also a California-based specialty lender of sorts. It focused on serving rich coastal Americans, enticing them with low-rate mortgages in exchange for leaving cash at the bank.

But that model unraveled in the wake of the SVB collapse, as First Republic clients withdrew more than $100 billion in deposits, the bank revealed in its earnings report April 24. Institutions with a high proportion of uninsured deposits like SVB and First Republic found themselves vulnerable because clients feared losing savings in a bank run.

Shares of First Republic are down 97% so far this year as of Friday’s close.

That deposit drain forced First Republic to borrow heavily from Federal Reserve facilities to maintain operations, which pressured the company’s margins because its cost of funding is far higher now. First Republic accounted for 72% of all borrowing from the Fed’s discount window recently, according to BCA Research chief strategist Doug Peta.

On April 24, First Republic CEO Michael Roffler sought to portray an image of stability after the events of March. Deposit outflows have slowed in recent weeks, he said. But the stock tanked after the company disavowed its previous financial guidance and Roffler opted not to take questions after an unusually brief conference call.

The bank’s advisors had hoped to persuade the biggest U.S. banks to help First Republic once again. One version of the plan circulated recently involved asking banks to pay above-market rates for bonds on First Republic’s balance sheet, which would enable it to raise capital from other sources.

But ultimately the banks, which had banded together in March to inject $30 billion of deposits into First Republic, couldn’t agree on the rescue plan and regulators took action, ending the bank’s 38-year run.

This story is developing. Please check back for updates.

The yield on the 10-year Treasury was trading around 3.464% at 3.20 a.m. ET, up 11 basis points. The 2-year Treasury yield was flat at 4.064%.

Yields and prices move in opposite directions. One basis point equals 0.01%.

The Fed is expected to announce a 25-basis point interest rate hike Wednesday at the conclusion of its meeting. Investors are particularly interested in any guidance on how long rates will remain elevated and when rate cuts could get underway.

It follows GDP figures last week indicating slower-than-expected economic growth in the first quarter. The personal consumption expenditure index, meanwhile — one of the Federal Reserve’s preferred inflation gauges — rose on the previous quarter, coming in at 4.2%.

On Monday, ISM manufacturing data, construction spending and S&P Global manufacturing PMI are due. Later in the week, April’s nonfarm payrolls report is slated for Friday.

If you think that life at sea is like the movie franchise “Pirates of the Caribbean,” think again.

The movies, which feature ambushes, looting and a drunken captain, are far from real life, according to shipping veteran Ralph Juhl.

“That is, of course, a lot of bollocks,” Juhl told CNBC by phone.

For starters, the consumption of alcohol is banned on many ships.

But there is one similarity with the movie, Juhl said: the code of conduct between seafarers. In the franchise, the Pirate’s Code was chronicled in a book kept by character Captain Teague, and loosely followed by some.

For those who sail for a living, there is a similar type of agreement, Juhl said.

“Seafarers, no matter where they come from — India, Ukraine, Denmark, the Philippines — there is this conduct of how you behave on a ship … You can actually endanger both yourself and all of your colleagues if you are not playing that social game, being on board the ship. So, you take responsibility, you follow authority,” Juhl said.

Juhl, an executive vice-president at oil tanker firm Hafnia, has worked in the industry for several decades, starting as an ordinary seaman — the lowest rank of sailor — in 1983.

“When you as a seafarer [go] on board … you are a contribution to the society and you have to fit in … there is this code of the high seas,” he added.

A captain’s life

“Pirates of the Caribbean” is a seafaring stereotype familiar to Hafnia’s DSA Dixon, who has been a captain for five years. Dixon — who sails vessels known as product tankers, which transport both refined and unrefined petroleum products around the world — had to convince his parents-in-law that his role was nothing like the movie, he told CNBC by phone.

“A lot of people have a very different representation of a seafarer, looking at Pirates of the Caribbean,” he said.

Dixon might be captaining a ship such as the huge Hafnia Rhine, which is about 230 meters long by 33 meters wide, with a capacity of more than 76,000 deadweight tons — a measure that includes the oil cargo, plus fuel, food, water and crew members, but not the weight of the ship itself.

Where the ship goes depends on where the demand for oil is and Dixon has sailed to every continent bar Antarctica, he said.

Dixon aims to keep to a schedule of three months at sea followed by three months at home in Mumbai, India, he said, and he started his most recent voyage on the Mississippi River in the U.S., sailing to Brazil and going on to Saudi Arabia via Gibraltar and the Suez Canal, before returning to Brazil.

Compared to someone working an office job, Dixon said he spends more time with his wife and six-year-old son, as when he is at home he’s “completely” there. “I love this part of my life, because when I go back home, I’m Santa Claus,” he said. “It doesn’t get stagnated at any point – when it’s about to get stagnated, I’m back at sea.”

High days and holidays

Aside from navigation, Dixon said the most important part of his job is to keep the crew in good spirits, as they spend months at sea together.

“We have at times, 20, 25 people on board, they’re all different nationalities, different cultures, different languages … our ship is as good as the people on it,” Dixon said.

There’s no fixed daily routine, Dixon added. “There’s no one way to describe life on board. It’s challenging of course, but the challenge keeps you motivated all the time,” he said.

Along with navigation and managing the crew, Dixon might be talking to officials who come aboard when the ship is docked or coming up with ways to celebrate religious festivals.

“Irrespective of nationality, or religion, people celebrate each other’s events or festivals,” Dixon said. “I even invent something like a treasure hunt on board. The ship is massive, I divide [crew] into teams … and let them find their own way,” Dixon added.

These games might sound “kiddish,” but they serve an important purpose, Dixon said. “These are grown-up men, some might be 50 years-old, and they’re doing this, but it’s the way to bond … we need to socialize and a happy ship is always an excellent vessel,” Dixon said.

Dixon makes sure the crew take Sundays off, spending it as they choose: perhaps playing PlayStation, chatting or sleeping. “I make sure there’s an excellent lunch,” Dixon added.

Traveling across oceans means getting to experience some of the world’s natural spectacles, with Dixon seeing the light phenomenon aurora borealis — also known as the northern lights — while sailing near Norway.

“The only regret I have is what I see I’m not able to share it, I want my family to see [things] at that very point, at that very moment, a photograph won’t capture it,” Dixon said. How did he feel seeing the lights? “You feel complete, I will say. You feel abundant,” he said.

“The greatest part of my job is I’ve seen things that an average human being might not,” he added.

Rough waters

Alongside enjoying scenes of wonder, life as a seafarer can be tough.

Hafnia Chief Engineer Dmytro Lifarenko is from Ukraine and was at home when Russia invaded the country in February 2022, fleeing with his wife and children across Europe to Valencia in Spain.

“I don’t know how I would handle … knowing that the bombs were there and I’m on board,” he told CNBC by phone, speculating about how he would have felt if he had been at sea when war broke out.

While his most recent voyage was five months long — sailing from Singapore to France and then Australia — he has recently taken extended leave to settle his family in their new home.

“I miss my family a lot during the voyage,” Lifarenko said — he and his wife have three children: a daughter of six months, six-year-old son and a 12-year-old daughter.

“Being two parents for three kids, this is fine. Being [effectively] a single mom for our kids, that’s very difficult … to be honest, this is the worst part of the job.”

This is something Juhl is sympathetic to: “That’s a big ‘uncomfort’ for many seafarers, that they are now so involved in their family [while at sea], even though they can’t do anything about it,” he said.

During the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, Lifarenko spent about six months onboard, which is longer than his usual voyage. He said guided meditations sent to him by Hafnia were useful to deal with an uncertain situation.

“You keep thinking about the things that you actually cannot change, and that’s quite close to depression, but this [was] like a helpful hand,” he said.

But, despite some downsides, Lifarenko said he loves his job because of its variety. “You cannot say what is your routine, because the routine part is quite small. Most of the time, you are solving some situation, which requires you to use your brain, and you’re thinking, how to fix this … or how can we maintain this in a better way,” he said.

He has also enjoyed seeing the natural world while onboard, including spotting whales and sailing close to the volcanic Canary Islands.

Future sailors

Juhl spent more than a decade as a seafarer, starting at age 16 and sailing to places such as Honduras and South Korea, and becoming a navigator on chemical carrier ships before captaining ferries. He came onshore in 1997 and is now responsible for Hafnia’s technical operations. He described those onboard as “working their butts off.”

“They never go ashore anymore, there are terminals far away from cities and so on. So, this romantic life and impression of seafarers, it is pretty much gone. It’s hard work,” he said.

This means attracting the next generation of crew is potentially tougher. “It’s a lonely life from time to time. And today you cannot offer young people loneliness,” he said.

Juhl wants to encourage more women to become seafarers and Hafnia is working on a pilot program to operate two ships where half the crew are female, to understand how the culture onboard might change, both positively and negatively, and how to solve that.

However, issues remain: Authorities in countries where women are discriminated against might not deal with female captains, for example, so Hafnia has had to temporarily assign a male captain for port stays in such places, Juhl said.

There has been internet access on board tankers for just a couple of years, Juhl added, and he wants to get creative about what might be possible as technology involves. 

He’s especially keen for sailors to be able to communicate with their families at home, he said.

“Hopefully we can soon make holograms where the captain can go to his cabin with his supper, and then he can open his hologram and he can sit and eat with his wife … we have to think that way,” Juhl said. And new technology will mean seafarers need different skills. “The boiler suit dressed man with a big spanner — it’s not the sailor that we’ll need in the future,” he said.

A robot takeover has long been the stuff of science fiction, but digitalization could be key in solving Germany’s labor shortage crisis, as its population ages.

A record 45.9 million people were employed by Europe’s largest economy in the fourth quarter of 2022, the German Federal Statistical Office found. But, while more people than ever have jobs, over half of German companies reported that they were struggling to find skilled workers to fill vacancies, according to German Chambers of Commerce reports from January.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz highlighted digitalization as a priority when he replaced Angela Merkel in November 2021, with a three-party coalition contract titled “Daring More Progress” pledging to implement digital technologies across the business world.

Aging populations tend to be faster at digitalizing their workforces — with Germany having the largest aging population in Europe, it’s unsurprising that it sits with Japan and South Korea as one of the countries utilizing technology in the workplace.

But what does enhancing the workforce through robots and digitalization actually look like?

Enhancing productivity

Digitalization manifests differently in every organization, whether through plate-carrying robots, self-checkout machines at grocery stores or using online platforms to chat to colleagues. In most cases, technology is added to make workflow more efficient and cost effective.

“We have to enhance productivity by technology,” Steffen Kampeter, chief executive of the Confederation of German Employers’ Associations told CNBC.

“There is a correlation between the use of modern technologies and the growth of economic growth and the labor market participation in most societies,” Steffen said.

Some 37% of Germans thought technological changes would increase their work productivity in 2018, according to Gallup research. Just 1% said that it would decrease productivity, while 62% opined technology wouldn’t have an impact.

Research by the analytics firm also suggested Germans aren’t afraid that robots will steal their jobs.

Only 10% of those surveyed believed implementing more tech would increase the risk of them losing their job, while 6% said it would decrease the chance of that happening. The remaining participants said that deploying more technology wouldn’t make a difference.

There won’t be major job losses as a result of digitalization, according to Ulrich Walwei, vice director of Germany’s Institute for Employment Research.

“There is this automation effect that means, of course, labor can be saved … But, on the other hand, it gives consumers and also firms opportunities to use their resources in a different way,” he said.

“What we see is a strong complementarity of digital technologies and economic activities,” Walwei added.

Europe’s largest economy also has the biggest stock of robots in the European Union — almost half of the total EU supply — according to a 2020 report by the European Commission. Most are installed in the automotive sector, but the food and beverage, industrial machinery and electronics industries have also taken on a high number of mechanical employees.

There were more than 20 robots per 1,000 manufacturing workers in Germany in 2015, the International Federation of Robotics and the European Jobs Monitor estimates, and that number is likely to have grown in the last eight years.

A hybrid future

Full digitalization is not desirable in many lines of work, even if it were possible.

“No one will give their grandma to a robot,” Norma Steller, chief product officer at German Bionic told CNBC.

German Bionic produces exoskeletons that counter-balance weight for employees in labor-intensive jobs and keep users in postures that will prevent them from injuring themselves.

Steller said the care sector would benefit from the addition of robots in workplaces, given its serious staff shortages and physically demanding roles.

“We kind of bridge the gap and put a robot on the human. The idea is we keep the human there with all the skills and emotions and empathy that is required for workplaces,” she added.

Digitalization also allows repetitive work to be automated, giving employees the chance to take on more mentally challenging tasks, says Cagri Pehlivan, CEO of robot services provider Robot4Work.

“Our robots can free up human workers to focus on more complex and creative work, leading to more fulfilling and engaging jobs,” Pehlivan told CNBC via email.

Outsourcing more physically intensive tasks to robots also facilitates older employees to stay in the workplace longer, Pehlivan said.

“By automating those tasks with robots, older workers can continue to contribute their valuable skills and experience to the workplace in a way that is safe and comfortable for them,” he said.

“Ultimately, the goal of integrating robots into the workplace is to augment human capabilities, not replace them,” he added.

Increasing numbers of older people are still working in Germany, with the employment rate of 55- to 64-year-olds up from 62% in 2012 to 71% in 2021, according to the German Federal Statistical Office.

This figure is only set to increase, as Germany looks to raise its state pension age from 65 to 67 in the coming years.

Challenges for digitalization

Germany is suffering from a digital skills gap, while some firms are “way behind,” when it comes to using digital technologies, Ulrich Walwei told CNBC.

“[Digital competency] is something which needs, of course, to be trained very early. That means also in schools and then also in apprenticeships and at university,” he added.

According to Eurostat data, 48.92% of the German population has “basic or above basic overall digital skills,” which is below the European Union average of 53.92%.

Almost 19% of individuals reported they had “above basic overall digital skills,” which is below the EU average of 26.46%, while 3.58% of Germans consider themselves to have “no overall digital skills,” which is slightly above the EU average of 3.04%.

People also have reservations about relying on robots. For example, 70% of 1,000 Germans polled by Gallup said that they would not feel safe being driven in a car without a human driver. Companies hoping to implement new technology also have a large number of regulatory hoops to jump through to guarantee user safety. Only after those tests are passed can digitalization start to become a seamless part of the working day.

But most people would lie, according to one workplace expert.

“There is a strong norm against clear honest and critical feedback in most organizations,” said Tessa West, a professor of psychology at NYU. 

“The default isn’t honest feedback. The default is bull—-.”

The main reason why most people find it hard to give frank feedback in exit interviews is because there is no “foundation” for them to have a difficult conversation. 

“That takes months and months of practice and daily feedback conversations to build that muscle. But [employers] want people to have that muscle on the most important day,” West added. 

While employees might think it’s not worth giving feedback when they’re already one foot out the door — West said there are benefits to being honest.

“Think about this as a way for you to learn how to have an uncomfortable feedback conversation, and you can practice on your ex-employer,” she added. 

“Learning how to take power in giving feedback is a really critical skill so don’t just throw it away.” 

The author of “Jerks at Work: Toxic Coworkers and What to Do About Them” shared five tips with CNBC Make It on how you can be more honest in exit interviews.

1. Know the power structure

Some may be afraid to speak their mind because of the perceived “power differential” in an exit interview — that the person conducting the interview can ruin your career or reputation. 

“The first thing that you need to do is to have a really clear understanding of what that power means and how it could be potentially used against you,” said West. 

“Because a HR person is probably not going to affect your reputation. But in your mind, there’s a million ways that information can get out and affect you.” 

Instead, West advised workers to ask, for example, will the feedback be anonymous? “If your name is going to the feedback and you might only be comfortable saying XYZ.” 

“Try to understand the nature of the power structure instead of assuming the worst from it,” she added. 

2. Know where the data is going

Besides knowing the power structure, you should also know what will happen to the information you give, said West. The interviewer should be able to answer these “critical” questions: 

• How are you going to consolidate the data that you collect?
• How are you going to look for themes?
• Where does this data go? 
• How are you going to communicate that data to the organization or the leaders?
• How are you going to act on that data?

“A lot of companies collect feedback and then figure out later what to do with it and I think it wastes everyone’s time and energy,” said West.

Having these questions answered can also help in dispelling your fears of giving honest feedback. 

“Because the data may not be used in a particular way that you think, now maybe you’re a little more comfortable being honest,” she added. 

3. Ask for specifics

The right questions will elicit honest responses, said West — and the questions should be as specific as possible. 

“If the questions are general, people lie. Questions like, did you like it here? What did you not like about this place?” 

“It’s not really your job to [make sure the interviewer is asking you the right questions], but if you want to be honest, push for specifics,” West added. Examples could be:

• Can you give me an example of what you mean by that? 
• Is there a behavior you want me to address?
• Is there a specific instance or context that you want me to speak to?

This can help you avoid the “temptation of just laying on the positive stuff,” she said. 

“If the interviewer isn’t willing to get specific, just say you don’t quite have enough detail to answer that question.” 

4. Focus on behaviors

If you find it difficult to give negative feedback about the workplace or management, West said a good place to start is “focusing on behaviors,” not your interpretation of events. 

For example, instead of saying someone “takes forever to get to things,” you can say: “I sent them an email once and they wrote back to me 48 hours later, and that was too long.” 

It will even be better if you have documentation of events that are “very yoked” to what individuals did and when they did it, West shared.

“What they did and when they did it is way more powerful than what you think about the person. Leave the impressions at the door,” she added. 

“Emotions are subjective, and they’re usually what we lead with — but they’re very easy to discount.” 

5. You can say no

If you feel like you cannot be honest in an exit interview, don’t do it, said West. 

“No data is better than misleading data. Refusing to do an exit interview can actually be super useful data for a company.” 

That is especially so in cultures where “there is a norm against saying something negative” and not doing the interview can be “super diagnostic,” she added. 

“People always ask me, ‘How do you know if I’m the jerk at work?’ Well, did you put in five names for this recruiter to check for references and none of them wrote back?”

West explained: “It’s like abstaining from a vote … it’s another form of data that allows you to still express yourself and raise the alarm bells.”

Don’t miss: Employee surveillance is on the rise — and that could backfire on employers
Like this story? Subscribe to CNBC Make It on YouTube!

That’s because restaurants in South Korea prefer groups of two or more, owing to a complex mix of local social dynamics, profit margins and simple logistics — a tableside grill has to be cleaned whether it serves one patron or four, after all.

Solo rejections commonly occurred at family restaurants and barbecue outlets, two quintessential spots to sample some of the country’s best cuisine. Solo diners could circumvent it in two ways: by placing an order for two or agreeing to a minimum spend.  

However, with the growth of one-person households in South Korea, more people are choosing to dine, drink and travel alone — embracing the “honjok” lifestyle trend that has visibly taken root in the country.

Eating out

Hongojib is unlike most barbecue places in Seoul.

Located in the lively neighborhood of Yeonnam-dong, the restaurant — and its predecessors, such as Sinssi Express and Hongo — have swapped traditional communal dining for the growing trend of honbap, or eating alone.

Diners eat at counters rather than round tables. And dishes aren’t served family style — each diner is given personal settings for condiments and cutlery along with their own grill.

Orders are placed and paid for with tablets. And food — alongside a cluster of classic banchan, or side dishes — is served within minutes.

Marianne Lee, a Korean education consultant, said this style of eating is a change from the days when “everyone has to eat in teams, everyone has to drink together, everyone has to go for the same menu.”

“If you wanted to have a Chinese meal, but if your manager says let’s go for Japanese noodles, you’d have no choice but to go,” she said. “But nowadays, people respect having their own time.”

With a following of more than 40,000 on TikTok, Lee — who said she’s spent equal parts of her life in the United Kingdom and South Korea — is popular for her videos about Korean culture, from bus etiquette to the best time to visit the country.

In her videos, she recommends solo travelers try restaurants such as Labap for fine dining, or Gimbap Cheongu and Pomato for their wide variety of Korean food.

The latter two “are open 24 hours and sell tteokbokki, rice dishes, soup and other hot cooked meals,” she said, referring to Korean spicy rice cakes.

Lee suggests visiting the popular tourist spots first, such as Namsan, Myeong Dong, Insadong and Itaewon, where people often speak some English. Multilingual tourist guides dressed in red coats and hats are there to help with travelers’ questions too, she said.

“It also helps when you add in a few Korean words, like hoksi (maybe) before you ask your question in English,” she adds. Koreans listen better than they speak, so she feels that it helps to “soften the approach and we really appreciate it.”

Where to stay

South Korea is popular with visitors from Asia, especially China and Japan, but visitors from Western countries, namely the United States, are on the rise. American travelers were the fourth-largest source market until 2019, but catapulted to the top demographic in 2022, according to Tourgo, a research initiative of the Korea Culture and Tourism Research Institute.

Earlier this year, South Korea announced a new visa for digital nomads is in the pipeline. The visa, which would allow foreigners to stay in Korea while working remotely for an employer in another country, is slated to start later this year, according to The Korea Herald.  

Luckily, it’s now far easier to find a place to stay than it was in the past.

New co-living companies, like Episode and Mangrove, were created in response to the rise of single-person households seeking affordable places to live in Seoul. Some residential buildings allow short-term lodging, which solo travelers can book.

I stayed at Mangrove Dongdaemun for a month in a clean and compact room that came with a workstation, private bathroom and a view of Mount Namsan.

Unlike hotels, there are communal kitchens and coworking spaces, plus a gym, yoga rooms, library and even free laundry self-service. An app links residents with chat boards and activities like “New Joiner Nights.”

The concept is popular, said Mangrove staff member Kim Serin, who added that the building is full most of the year. She said short-stay requests are increasing, and that the company is working to meet this need with new projects coming in two other popular destinations, Busan and Jeju.

Celib Soonra is another residence designed for solo residents and travelers. Stays under three months can be booked via Airbnb, which is how I booked my stay.

My room was less cookie-cutter and came with local touches like a traditional tea room, and the rooftop has panoramic views of Changdeokgung palace and Jongmyo Shrine.

Its neighborhood, Gwonnong-dong, is more intimate too, and the hip cafe-filled Hanok village of Ikseon-dong is but a 10-minute walk away.

Business hotels too

Business hotels, like those from the hospitality brand Accor, are also working to create hybrid living spaces where travelers and locals can “live, work and play,” according to its website.

Accor’s Ibis brand offers an example of this. At the Ibis Styles Ambassador Seoul Gangnam, I could see how small changes can make a huge difference, such as the communal garden on the hotel’s 15th floor, where I worked on days I had tight deadlines.

I also slept in an ondol room at the hotel, which had heated floors and traditional bedding, something that is usually found only in traditional houses and hanoks that caters to groups. Near Gangnam’s Coex Mall, it was also a steal at less than $55 a night.

Australian and Japanese markets are both trading higher even as most Asian markets are closed for the Labor Day holiday Monday.

In Japan, the Nikkei 225 was 0.92% higher to end the day at 29,123.18, while the Topix was up 1% to finish at 2,078.06. Japan’s purchasing managers index for April came in at 49.5, its softest contraction in six months, according to the au Jibun bank.

Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 rose 0.35% and closed at 7,334.6, as the country saw its factory activity in April contracting at its fastest pace in 35 months, with private surveys from Juno Bank showing its purchasing managers index standing at 48.

Over the weekend, China’s factory activity unexpectedly slipped into contraction territory with its official manufacturing purchasing managers index at 49.2, in contrast to economists expectations of 51.4.

On Friday, the three major indexes in the U.S. all closed higher, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average gaining 0.8% to notch its best month since January. The S&P 500 added 0.83%, while the Nasdaq Composite advanced 0.69%.

— CNBC’s Alex Harring and Sarah Min contributed to this report

Sony shares tumble as much as 4.8% after guidance misses expectations

Shares of Japanese conglomerate Sony tumbled as much as 4.8% on Monday despite the company reporting a record annual operating profit of 1.21 trillion yen ($8.8 billion) for its financial year ending March.

The stock has recovered some ground, and was trading about 1.91% down by early afternoon.

On Friday, Sony forecast its operating profit would come in at 1.17 trillion yen, down 3% year-on-year and lower than analysts forecasts of 1.26 trillion yen.

Sales for the current fiscal year are predicted to come in at 11.5 trillion yen, roughly flat versus last year. However, this is also lower than the 12.16 trillion yen forecasted by analysts.

— Lim Hui Jie

South Korea exports decline for seventh month in a row

South Korean exports dropped for the seventh-straight month, registering a 14.2% decline year-on-year.

The fall was larger than economists expectations of a 13.5% decline, and the seven-month losing streak is its longest in three years.

Reuters said a breakdown of the data showed exports to China tumbled 26.5%, an 11th-straight month of decline. Yonhap reported that exports of semiconductors sank 41% on falling demand and a drop in chip prices.

Imports fell 13.3% in April compared with a year ago, versus a 10.6% decline expected by economists, and was the largest drop since August 2020.

As a result, the country posted a trade deficit of $2.62 billion in April, lower than the $4.63 billion recorded in March.

— Lim Hui Jie

Australia expected to hold inflation rate steady at 3.6%

Australia’s central bank is expected to hold its benchmark policy rate at 3.6% when it announces its decision Tuesday.

A Reuters poll of 34 economists revealed that 26 of them expect the Reserve Bank of Australia to keep rates at current levels, while the remaining eight forecast a 25-basis-point hike.

If the RBA hikes rates to 3.85%, that would be the highest level since April 2012.

Australia’s inflation — a key data point for the RBA — eased to 7% in the first quarter, lower than the 7.8% recorded at the end of 2022.

— Lim Hui Jie

Japan manufacturing activity sees softer contraction in April

Japan’s manufacturing activity remained in contraction territory for the sixth-straight month, although April’s figures were the softest contraction reported in that period.

According to au Jibun Bank, the country’s manufacturing purchasing managers index improved to 49.5, up from 49.2 in March.

The bank said the improvement came from a slower reduction in new orders inflows. “Firms registered a tenth consecutive reduction, but the rate of contraction was the softest since last November,” it observed.

Japanese manufacturers allocated resources to clear backlogs and hired more to prepare for an eventual demand recovery. Employment levels rose for the twenty-fifth month in a row and at the strongest pace since last October, the bank said.

—Lim Hui Jie

Australia’s factory activity contracts at fastest pace in 35 months: Juno Bank

Australia’s factory activity has shrunk at its fastest pace in 35 months, according to private surveys from Juno Bank.

The manufacturing purchasing managers index for April stood at 48, down from March’s figure of 49.1, marking a second straight month-on-month deterioration.

A reading above 50 signals expansion, while a reading below 50 indicates contraction.

In its release, the bank said that this was due to weak demand for Australian goods, observing that new orders declined for the fifth month running and at the fastest rate since August 2021.

It also noted that survey respondents commented on broad-based economic weakness, driven in part by high interest rates.

— Lim Hui Jie

China factory activity unexpectedly shrinks in April

China’s factory activity contracted in April, in contrast to economists expectations for growth.

Data from the National Bureau of Statistics revealed the country’s manufacturing purchasing manager’s index fell to 49.2 from 51.9 in March, below the 51.4 expected by economists.

A reading of above 50 indicates expansion, while a reading of below 50 indicates contraction.

This also marks the first contraction since December, when the official manufacturing PMI was at 47.

— Lim Hui Jie

CNBC Pro: Here’s what history indicates is in store for U.S. and global stocks in May

The S&P 500 and the MSCI World Index posted gains in April fitting their historical pattern.

So where does the market go from here?

CNBC Pro subscribers can read more about how stocks tend to perform in May, according to history.

— Ganesh Rao

Friday PCE data gives Fed a reason to hike interest rates again, investment advisor says

Friday’s personal consumption expenditures price index data could give the Federal Reserve a reason to once again raise interest rates at its meeting next week, said Ryan Belanger, founder and managing principal of Claro Advisors.

The data, which was in line with economist expectations when looking at month-over-month change in so-called “core” PCE, is a key gauge of inflation for the central bank. And it comes ahead of the Fed policy meeting scheduled for next week.

The Fed raised interest rates by 25 basis points, or a quarter of a percentage point, at its most recent meeting. Belanger said to expect that again to the chagrin of some market participants.

“Friday’s inflation report gives the Federal Reserve an excuse to hike interest rates by 25 basis points at the May meeting, even though there is a growing chorus among investors for the Fed to pause its rate hikes given worries about the economy,” he said.

— Alex Harring

Core PCE price index rose in line with expectations

The core personal consumption expenditures price index, a key measure of inflation for the Federal Reserve, rose as much as economists expected last month.

The core index rose 0.3% in March, which is what economists polled by Dow Jones anticipated.

— Jeff Cox

Consumer-focused stocks among this week’s biggest gainers

With 50% of S&P 500 companies having now posted their quarterly results, certain stocks — in particular, consumer names — outperformed the market this week.

Those gains came as earnings ramped up, with several Big Tech names and industrial giants posting their latest figures.

Investors were also looking ahead to next week’s Federal Reserve announcement. As of Friday afternoon, there was an 86% probability of the central bank raising rates by 25 basis points, according to the CME Group’s FedWatch tool.

CNBC Pro subscribers can read about this week’s top outperformers, and where analysts see them going, here.

— Hakyung Kim

First Republic most likely headed for receivership, sources say

First Republic is most likely headed for receivership, sources told CNBC’s David Faber.

The FDIC is talking to other financial firms about potential offers for First Republic in the event that the regulator seizes the regional bank, the sources said. However, there is still hope for a rescue deal that does not involve receivership.

The stock, which was mostly flat in early trading, is now down more than 20%. It has lost more than 95% since 2023 began.

— Jesse Pound

Energy and consumer staples stocks lead S&P 500 up this month

Energy and consumer staples stocks have aided the S&P 500‘s advance this month.

With just Friday’s session left in the April trading month, consumer staples and energy sectors are both slated to post monthly gains of 3.4%. Those jumps make them the top performing of the broad index’s 11 sectors this month.

Consumer staples has been led by up Molson Coors and Mondelez, which have gained more than 15% and 10%, respectively, since the month began. Hess and EQT have led the ascent for energy, with each advancing more than 9% on the month.

By comparison, the S&P 500 is poised to finish April 1.3% higher. Consumer discretionary and industrial stocks have weighed on the index as both sectors are on track to end the month more than 1% in the red.

— Alex Harring

Futures tied to the Dow climbed 6 points, or 0.02% while S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 futures rose 0.07% and 0.09% respectively.

Stocks are coming off a winning week and month. On Friday, the blue-chip index added 272 points, or 0.8%, while the S&P 500 rose 0.83%. The Nasdaq Composite advanced 0.69% as Big Tech earnings took center stage.

For the month, the Dow gained 2.5% to notch its best monthly stretch since January, while the benchmark index gained 1.5%. The tech-heavy index posted marginal gains.

Earnings reports from major tech companies dominated much of last week’s market debate, fueling the narrative that earnings are faring better-than-feared, despite many widespread macroeconomic concerns.

So far, a little over half of S&P 500 companies have reported earnings, with more than 79% and about 72% surpassing earnings and sales expectations, respectively. First-quarter earnings are currently on track to fall 3.7% for the period, a smaller drop than the 6.7% decline projected on March 31, according to FactSet.

“There was definitely a very positive surprise on the big tech earnings,” said Jan Szilagyi, CEO of Toggle AI. “There was a certain trepidation going into the earnings season,” as expectations called for relative weakness.

Reports from many of these technology giants helped to lift some market confidence, he added.

Elsewhere, CNBC reported over the weekend that regulators have called on banks to submit a final offer for embattled lender First Republic, under pressure from deposit flight in the wake of Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse. JPMorgan Chase and PNC are among the likely bidders.

The latest update comes after the bank reported last week that deposits tumbled more than 40% in the first quarter, triggering further declines in the already struggling stock. Shares have cratered 97% since the start of the year.

In other news, investors anxiously await the latest rate hike decision from the Federal Reserve, due out Wednesday at the conclusion of the central bank’s policy meeting. As of Sunday evening, about 79% of traders anticipate a 25 basis point rate hike, according to CME Group’s FedWatch tool. Wall Street will closely monitor remarks from Fed Chair Jerome Powell, offering clues into the central bank’s forward policy path.

Monday kicks off another busy week for earnings, with results from Norwegian Cruise Line and MGM Resorts. Reports from Pfizer, Starbucks, Advanced Micro Devices and CVS Health are due out later in the week.

On the economic front, Wall Street awaits ISM manufacturing data, construction spending and S&P Global manufacturing PMI on Monday. April’s nonfarm payrolls report is on deck Friday.

Australia expected to hold inflation rate steady at 3.6%

Australia’s central bank is expected to hold its benchmark policy rate at 3.6% when it announces its decision Tuesday.

A Reuters poll of 34 economists revealed that 26 of them expect the Reserve Bank of Australia to keep rates at current levels, while the remaining eight forecast a 25-basis-point hike.

If the RBA hikes rates to 3.85%, that would be the highest level since April 2012.

Australia’s inflation — a key data point for the RBA — eased to 7% in the first quarter, lower than the 7.8% recorded at the end of 2022.

— Lim Hui Jie

China factory activity unexpectedly shrinks in April

China’s factory activity contracted in April, in contrast to economists expectations for growth.

Data from the National Bureau of Statistics revealed the country’s manufacturing purchasing manager’s index fell to 49.2 from 51.9 in March, below the 51.4 expected by economists.

A reading of above 50 indicates expansion, while a reading of below 50 indicates contraction.

This also marks the first contraction since December, when the official manufacturing PMI was at 47.

— Lim Hui Jie

Four technology stocks account for 60% of S&P 500’s 2023 gains

Just four technology stocks account for 60% of the S&P 500’s 8.6% gain so far in 2023, according to Bespoke Investment Group.

That includes Apple and Microsoft, making up 39% of that gain combined. Nvidia and Meta Platforms together account for another 21%.

Technology stocks have been on a tear in 2023 as investors rotate back into the beaten-down growth sector.

Of the group, Meta Platforms has experienced the sharpest gains, with shares up nearly 100%. Nvidia and Microsoft have jumped about 90% and 28%, respectively, as the drive for artificial intelligence dominates investor focus. Apple’s stock is up 30.6%.

— Samantha Subin

Where the major averages stands

This is where all the major averages stand as a new month of trading begins.

Dow Jones Industrial Average:

• Up 2.9% for the year
• Gained 2.5% in April for its best month since January
• Sits 7.7% off its record high

S&P 500:

• Gained 8.6% year to date
• Rose 1.5% in April
• 13.5% off record high

Nasdaq Composite:

• Up 16.8% in 2023
• Added 0.04% in April
• 24.6% off record high

— Samantha Subin, Chris Hayes

Mario Gabelli shares the best trades he’s ever made

Focusing on this simple phenomenon helped veteran investor Mario Gabelli make what he calls some of the best trades in his expansive career.

“That notion is going global, of finding companies that have pricing power in the world that we see, run by good management, with good businesses at reasonable prices,” the Gamco Investors CEO and chairman told CNBC at the Morningstar Investment Conference in Chicago.

Read more about the phenomenon and the names he ranks among his best trades here.

— Samantha Subin

Stock futures open flat

Stock futures opened flat on Sunday.

Futures tied to the Dow traded flat, while S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 futures inched 0.05% and 0.07% lower, respectively.

— Samantha Subin

In its last quarterly earnings report, Home Depot forecast flat sales and lower profits for 2023, partly because consumers aren’t spending as much on home improvement products as they did during the pandemic, a boon period for the sector. Another hit to its bottom line, the company predicted, was the decision to invest $1 billion this year to increase hourly wages for every one of its frontline workers.

Giving pay raises at the same time sales are slumping seems like an incongruous strategy, but Home Depot executives project that it will actually boost the big-box retailer’s industry-leading position. “We plan to continue to capture market share,” CFO Richard McPhail told analysts during the February earnings call. One reason, he said, is “the unique advantage that our orange-blooded associates give us over our competition,” alluding to Home Depot’s signature color and the term for its frontline employees.

While Home Depot made a splash with the billion-dollar pay hike, it comes on the heels of similar moves by other major retailers that also espoused the benefits of investing in a well-paid workforce.

A year ago February, Target set a new starting wage range from $15 to $24 an hour for its so-called team members and expanded access to health care benefits, at a cost of $300 million in 2022. “We know that those investments lead to a more engaged team and that team then builds greater guest trust and loyalty, which in turn continues to power our growth across the company,” said Melissa Kremer, chief human resources officer, last fall when Target was named 12th among Fortune’s 100 best companies to work for.

In January, Walmart announced it was raising the minimum hourly wage for its store employees to $14 from $12 and up to $19 an hour, establishing an average wage of $17.50 an hour. “Retaining talent and establishing career opportunities for our associates remains a central objective to our growth ambitions,” CFO John David Rainey said at an investor meeting in April. “We are confident we can make the investments needed to remain competitive in a tight labor market while also growing our profitability.”

Although it’s difficult to draw a straight line from the cost of labor to sales, profits and market share — and retailers are also making big investments in automation — retaining a loyal and satisfied workforce can be seen as a wise strategy amid an ongoing battle for talent, and even as persistent inflation and interest rate hikes are expected to further moderate what has been robust consumer spending.

Irrespective of Home Depot’s strong track record on Wall Street, Morgan Stanley analyst Simeon Gutman said he was somewhat surprised by the $1-billion outlay. “The investment community largely thought Home Depot was already in prime position in terms of wage rates,” he said, noting a series of pay increases in recent years. And the fact that the company is anticipating less-than-rosy sales this year was another eyebrow-raiser. “The [home improvement] environment seems to be weakening, not accelerating, and therefore incremental wage investments at this time would open the door to more questions and surprise. But if you look at Home Depot over multiple years, you’re okay with it.”

Ann-Marie Campbell, executive vice president of U.S. stores and international operations at Home Depot, says the increase in wages is just one component of the investment story in associates. “We know that the key to an engaged and committed workforce is investing in the person and in their development,” she said.

The company also began the year with a new store leadership structure, creating new management positions and increasing the number of managers on the floor at any given time. “This is a meaningful investment that we believe will position us favorably in the marketplace,” she said.

“Essentially what they’re doing is reinvesting in a key competitive advantage of their business model, which is service within their stores,” said Brian Nagel, an analyst with Oppenheimer.

Market leaders such as Home Depot, Walmart and Target that have scale should be in better positions than mid-size competitors to invest in their labor force, Gutman said. “They’re behaving as they should given the tight labor market, showing leadership and not just thinking about a 12-month timeframe. They’re thinking about 12 to 36 months.”

The efficiency wage theory

The concept that maintaining a well-compensated, enthusiastic workforce is good for business is at the heart of what labor economists refer to as the efficiency wage theory, which postulates that paying employees higher than minimum wages increases productivity, retention rates and loyalty. That, in turn, is reflected in customer satisfaction and goodwill versus the competition.

“Providing customers a compelling reason to shop at your stores requires giving them real value and good service, and that’s not possible without having motivated and empowered employees,” said Zeynep Ton, a professor at MIT Sloan School of Management in Cambridge, Massachusetts, who has studied retail operations for more than 20 years. “Any retailer that wants to win needs to make sure they attract and retain the right employees and design their jobs so they can be productive and serve their customers well. And in a tight labor market, it’s getting increasingly difficult to keep talent [if] you pay unlivable wages and [offer] few opportunities for growth and success.”

In addition to the efficiency wage theory, there is significant empirical evidence that paying low wages hinders employees’ ability to focus on the job and be productive, said Ton, who expounds on this topic in her forthcoming book, “The Case for Good Jobs.”

“It also drives turnover and attendance problems,” she said. “The bottom line is that employee turnover and low pay cost companies a lot more than executives may think, both financially and competitively.”

It’s hard to say when, and if, Home Depot will see a demonstrable return on the monumental expenditure for its frontline workers. Regardless, CEO Ted Decker said during the February earnings call, “We harken back to … what our founders said: that if we take care of our associates, they take care of the customer and everything takes care of itself. That’s what this investment is all about.” 

Charlie Munger believes there is trouble ahead for the U.S. commercial property market.

The 99-year-old investor told the Financial Times that U.S. banks are packed with “bad loans” that will be vulnerable as “bad times come” and property prices fall.

“It’s not nearly as bad as it was in 2008,” he told the Financial Times in an interview. “But trouble happens to banking just like trouble happens everywhere else.” 

Munger’s warning comes as U.S. regulators have asked banks for their best and final takeover offers for First Republic by Sunday afternoon, the latest in what has been a tumultuous period for midsized U.S. banks.

Since the failure of Silicon Valley Bank in March, attention has turned to First Republic as the weakest link in the American banking system. Shares of the bank sank 90% last month and then collapsed further this week after First Republic disclosed how dire its situation is.

Berkshire Hathaway, where Munger serves as vice chairman, has largely stayed on the fringe of the crisis despite its history of supporting American banks through times of turmoil. Munger, who is also Warren Buffett’s longtime investment partner, suggested that Berkshire’s restraint is partially due to risks that could emerge from banks’ numerous commercial property loans.

“A lot of real estate isn’t so good anymore,” Munger said. “We have a lot of troubled office buildings, a lot of troubled shopping centers, a lot of troubled other properties. There’s a lot of agony out there.”

Read the complete Financial Times interview here.

As a psychologist who studies narcissism, I’ve found that, in most cases, highly narcissistic people are masters of gaslighting. Their primary goal in a relationship is to offset their insecurity by controlling and manipulating others.

Here are six phrases that they always use — and how to deal with them:

1. “I don’t want to make this about me, but…”

Statements like this show that narcissistic people know they shouldn’t dominate the conversation, yet they do it anyway. It’s like a pseudo-disclaimer that gives them permission to only focus on themselves.

How to handle it: If you get into a conversation with a narcissist, be prepared for their story hour. If it’s interesting, listen. You can even treat it like an IRL podcast. But if you’re hoping for a two-way conversation, look elsewhere.

2. “I’m sorry you feel that way.”

Narcissists have a hard time admitting fault, and this is their classic attempt at an apology. But it’s actually more of a deflection.

With this phrase, they’re implying that your feelings are your issues alone, and that they’ll take no responsibility for their behavior.

How to handle it: Without genuine remorse, no matter what the transgression was, they’ll likely do it again. My advice is to simply disengage. To avoid getting hurt in the future, it is often best to see people for who they really are.

3. “Why are you doing this to me?”

Narcissists have a stunning capacity to shift from being the offender to being the victim.

You may be the one who has the flu or a tough week at work. But if whatever you’re struggling with inconveniences them, it will be framed as their problem.

How to handle it: You can get a degree of power back through self-awareness. Otherwise, you may find yourself constantly wondering if you’re actually at fault. Seek support — from a therapist or empathetic friend, for example — to remind yourself that you’re not the offender.

4. “I’m a busy person. I don’t have time for this.”

“This” can be anything — maybe you want to discuss a project you’re working on together or you’re inviting them to a work event.

The hallmarks of a narcissist are entitlement, a lack of empathy and the inability to maintain reciprocal relationships. Not only are they unable to understand another person’s needs, but they’re also dismissive of them.

How to handle it: Recognize their limitations. They likely won’t make time for you unless they need something. These relationships are often the equivalent of going to an empty well for water, so do what you can to foster support independent of the narcissist.

5. “I hope you know who you’re messing with.”

The evil twin to this is: “If you ever do wrong by me, I’ll make your life a living hell.”

This tactic of dangling menace and the possibility of vengeance is how they create an illusion of power and a sense of fear in you. Most people don’t want to face this perceived threat, so they comply.

How to handle it: This can be unsettling, especially if you’re dealing with someone who does have a track record of making other people miserable. Documentation is key. Save all emails and messages. If there’s a genuine safety issue, work with local authorities to devise a plan. 

6. “It’s not fair.”

Narcissists believe there should be a set of rules for them, and separate set of rules for everyone else. When they have to comply, or a consequence is enforced, it’s a reminder that they are not special.

Whether their friend’s company is doing great and making lots of money, or they have to pay a penalty because they tried to game the system and got caught, you can expect a rant of “it’s not fair” statements.

How to handle it: You may be tempted to appease them, perhaps out of guilt or to avoid conflict. But doing so will set an impossible precedent. Don’t try to be a person who tries to make life “fair” for them by making unreasonable personal sacrifices.

Dr. Ramani Durvasula is a psychologist, professor of psychology at California State University, Los Angeles, and founder of LUNA Education. She is also the author of “Don’t You Know Who I Am: How to Stay Sane in the Era of Narcissism, Entitlement and Incivility″ and “Should I Stay or Should I Go: Surviving a Relationship With a Narcissist.” Follow her on Twitter @DoctorRamani.

Don’t miss:

• Harvard-trained psychologist: If you use any of these 9 phrases every day, ‘your relationship is more successful’ than most
• The 8 ‘rarest’ types of employees—they ‘simply outperform everyone else,’ says career expert
• Harvard neuroscientist: The ‘most underrated’ skill all successful people have—’especially introverts’

Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

The Sunshine State saw a massive influx of residents over 60 in 2021, according to a recent SmartAsset study. Over 78,000 seniors moved to Florida from other states during that time — more than to any other state, and more than three times as many as Arizona, which ranked second on the list.

In order to determine where retirees are moving, SmartAsset analyzed migration patterns for 146 large U.S. cities, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2021 one-year American Community Survey, the latest available. The study defines retirees as Americans aged 60 and older, although SmartAsset notes that not all Americans over 60 are retirees.

SmartAsset calculated each state’s net migration by subtracting the number of people over 60 who moved out of a state from the number who moved in.

Florida has long been a popular destination for retirees, but although residents bear the sixth-lowest tax burden in the country, the state’s cost of living has steadily risen over the years. Home prices alone have increased a little over 290% since 1998.

Here are the top 10 states retirees moved to in 2021, according to SmartAsset.

Remember, retirement will look different for everyone, and many factors can impact where you choose to live after you retire. You may prioritize living close to family, while someone else may seek out the lowest cost of living.

Before making a permanent move, a good rule of thumb is to spend time in the location you’d like to retire in at multiple points throughout the year. This can help give you a sense of what it may be like to live there in the long-term.

DON’T MISS: Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

Join CNBC’s Small Business Playbook virtually on May 4th, where entrepreneurs will share advice and tips on how to handle economic uncertainty, inflation and more so your business can succeed for the short-term and the long-term. Register for free today.

The cloud-computing market keeps growing as companies move an increasing number of workloads out of their own data centers, but executives from the leading cloud vendors said this week that clients are looking for ways to trim costs.

The result is slowing revenue growth at the cloud divisions run by Amazon, Microsoft and Google. And for Amazon Web Services, the leader in the space, it means a slimmer operating margin and less profit for its parent company.

It’s a phenomenon that began in 2022, as fears of a recession hit the economy. AWS saw deceleration in the third and fourth quarters, and last quarter Microsoft finance chief Amy Hood spooked analysts with comments about a slowdown in December that she expected to persist.

Amazon finance chief Brian Olsavsky was the bearer of bad news for investors on Thursday, when he said that in April, AWS revenue growth had slumped by about five percentage points from the first-quarter growth rate of almost 16%. The company’s stock price slid in response.

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said “what we’re seeing is enterprises continuing to be cautious in their spending in this uncertain time.”

At Google, cloud growth slowed to 28% from a year earlier in the first quarter from 32% in the prior period. The deceleration occurred even as Google’s cloud segment reached profitability for the first time on record.

“We saw some headwind from slower growth of consumption with customers really looking to optimize their costs given that macro climate,” said Ruth Porat, Alphabet’s finance chief, on Tuesday’s earnings call.

Sundar Pichai, Alphabet’s CEO, said the slowdown is understandable.

“We are leaning into optimization,” he said. “This is an important moment to help our customers, and we take a long-term view. And so it’s definitely an area we are leaning in and trying to help customers make progress on their efficiencies where we can.”

The companies remain optimistic that cloud will continue to be a strong market for tech, as businesses still have a long way to go before they’ll be fully taking advantage of the benefits.

“People sometimes forget that 90-plus percent of global IT spend is still on-premises,” Jassy said.

And Hood noted that pretty soon the financial comparisons will be against numbers from the point last year when the market was softening.

“When you start to anniversary that, you do see that it gets a little bit easier in terms of the comps year-over-year,” Hood said.

WATCH: Ongoing deceleration in IT spending not reflected in tech earnings

Corporate stories have ebbs and flows, ups and downs.

To this point, BuzzFeed‘s journey as a public company has been a bottomless pit. Co-founder and Chief Executive Jonah Peretti may be running out of time to alter his company’s trajectory.

The digital media company known for its listicles and quizzes is in crisis mode. Its stock has fallen 95% since the company went public at $10 a share in December 2021. The shares closed Friday at nearly 54 cents, giving the company a market valuation of about $86 million.

If a company trades for 30 consecutive business days below the $1 mark, Nasdaq will send a deficiency notice to the company, giving it 180 more days to top $1 or risk getting delisted. BuzzFeed has traded below $1 for six days in a row as of Friday’s close.

There are loopholes and conditions. BuzzFeed could do a reverse stock split to artificially boost its share value and stay in compliance — a move last year executed by insurance firm Hippo after it had an average closing price of less than $1 over a consecutive 30-day trading period. Hippo continues to survive as a listed company.

Peretti’s plan is to boost shares back over $1 by persuading investors he’s prepared to run a more profitable company. That’s what led him to shut down BuzzFeed’s Pulitzer-winning but money-losing newsroom last week and lay off 180 employees, or 15% of the company’s staff.

“I’m trying to set us up with a better future and align with major trends,” Peretti said in an exclusive interview with CNBC. “If I do that well, my leadership will be a success. If not, it won’t be.”

BuzzFeed reported a net loss of $201 million for 2022 (including a non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $102.3 million) after turning a $26 million profit in 2021. The company’s investor day is May 11. Peretti will try to convince shareholders his vision should be trusted.

It’s fair to question Peretti’s decision-making in not shutting down BuzzFeed News earlier, he acknowledged. CNBC reported in March last year that investors asked him to shut it down.

Still, he has no plans to step down as CEO or sell the company despite the company’s 95% loss in value, he said.

“I’d be more concerned with my leadership if I didn’t see where the market was heading,” he said.

Peretti’s strategy

Peretti hopes incorporating more artificial intelligence into the company’s content will both boost engagement and save the company on cost. In the past two months, BuzzFeed AI-powered quizzes have led to a 40% spike in how long a user has participated compared with human-generated quizzes, Peretti wrote in a BuzzFeed blog post Thursday.

“Formats that were developed before the AI-revolution, and many of the formats and conventions of the media industry will need to be updated and adapted, or begin to feel stale and outdated,” Peretti wrote in the post. “This is why we’ve been investing in AI-powered content and launching new formats like Infinity Quizzes and Chatbot games.”

Some of Peretti’s predictions seem counterintuitive when considering what the next version of the internet might entail. He wrote that he expects news homepages to have a resurgence as destinations as social media companies such as Facebook, TikTok and Twitter turn their back on news for more general entertainment. That’s why he’s confident in the future of BuzzFeed brand HuffPost, which surged in popularity during the mid-2000s with its creative splash headlines.

“In fact on Monday this week, HuffPost hit 16 million page views — a record high since joining BuzzFeed, Inc. — a sign this prediction is already coming true,” Peretti wrote.

Peretti said he believes BuzzFeed can operate profitably by “covering trends, making shopping more playful, creating new interactive AI formats, and helping creators connect with our audience.”

This, too, could be wishful thinking if digital audiences move beyond old methods of internet usage and toward augmented reality and gaming, where BuzzFeed has no current strategy.

A dream burst

BuzzFeed’s announcement in January that it would begin using AI to help generate quizzes gave BuzzFeed a brief surge in value, with shares jumping 120%.

But for the most part, BuzzFeed shares have been all chute and no ladder.

BuzzFeed went public via a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, to great fanfare on Dec. 6, 2021. For a moment on that day, shares surged from $10 to more than $14. BuzzFeed’s valuation briefly surged past $1.5 billion — more than three times the amount Disney offered to buy it a decade earlier, as described in an excerpt from a new book by former BuzzFeed News editor-in-chief Ben Smith.

In those early hours of day one trading, an entire industry began thinking about its future differently. If BuzzFeed could find a receptive audience among public investors, companies such as Vice, Vox Media, Group Nine, and Bustle Digital Group — all of whom had venture capital backers who wanted to make a return on their investment — could either go public themselves or take publicly traded equity as part of an industrywide rollup.

Then, the market turned. BuzzFeed ended the day down 11%. The next day, shares fell again. By the end of BuzzFeed’s first week of trading, shares were down 39%.

“I just bought a f—ton of BuzzFeed shares at $6,” Bustle Digital Group CEO Bryan Goldberg told CNBC at the end of that first week. “If it goes lower, I’ll really back up the truck.”

BuzzFeed shares did go lower. And lower. By June, shares were below $2. The advertising market started to sag as interest rates rose and company valuations suffered. Shares first fell below $1 last month. (Goldberg said he didn’t actually buy shares until they were closer to $1 and then sold them during February’s AI pop).

With their fates tied to BuzzFeed’s performance, digital media companies have abandoned the rollup dream and the go-public experiment. Vice announced this week it’s restructuring its global news operation, including laying off 100 employees. The company has been searching for a buyer for more than a year. Vox Media sold a 20% stake to privately held Penske Media in February for a $100 million capital infusion. Vox and Group Nine merged last year.

Instead of being the flag bearer for the digital media industry, BuzzFeed now looks like it’s trapped on an island, forced to publicly flail while onlookers shake their heads. When it went public, BuzzFeed promised surging revenue, estimating $654 million by the end of 2022, $833 million by the end of 2023 and $1.1 billion by the end of 2024.

BuzzFeed’s actual annual revenue for 2022 was $437 million. The predictions for 2023 and 2024 currently look like pipe dreams.

Peretti may have only one more chance to turn his company’s fate.

“This feels like an inflection point,” he said.

WATCH: CNBC’s full interview with BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti in 2021 on market debut

To create this list, TipRanks analyzed every stock recommendation made by investment research firms in the past decade. The ranking is based on the average return, success rate and statistical significance (number of recommendations made) of the ratings of analysts working at those firms.

By incorporating statistical significance into our analysis, the list prioritizes firms with a higher number of ratings. This explains why some research firms may have a higher success rate and average return yet rank lower.

TipRanks has leveraged its Experts Center tool to identify the top 10 research firms.

Top 10 Wall Street Research Firms

The image below shows the most successful Wall Street research firms in descending order.

1. RBC Capital

Topping the list is the global investment bank RBC Capital. The firm’s 223 analysts issued 27,352 recommendations, the most out of all firms on this list, across various sectors. RBC Capital sports a success rate of 56%. Based on its recommendations, the firm generated an average return of 9.3%.

2. Jefferies

Full-service investment banking and capital markets firm Jefferies came second on the list. It has delivered an average return of 8.3% and has a success rate of 56% based on 25,218 ratings from 358 analysts. The firm’s most profitable sector is Utilities.

3. Truist Financial

Grabbing the third spot is the financial services provider Truist Financial. It has generated an average return of 13.4% based on 10,164 recommendations by 66 analysts across a diverse range of sectors. It has a success rate of 60%. 

4. Credit Suisse

Taking fourth place is the global financial services firm Credit Suisse. Its 467 analysts provided 18,683 recommendations across diverse sectors, generating an average return of 8.3%. Credit Suisse has a 57% success rate. 

Note: Credit Suisse was acquired by UBS on March 19.

5. UBS

Swiss banking and financial services giant UBS came in fifth place. Its 417 analysts have a 58% success rate on over 15,800 ratings, with an average return of 7.2%. The firm’s most profitable sector is Technology.

6. Keefe, Bruyette & Woods (KBW)

KBW is a full-service, boutique investment bank, and broker-dealer. Its team of 75 analysts issued 3,947 stock recommendations. The analysts have been most successful at recommending Services sector stocks. It boasts a success rate of 65%, the highest on this list, and an average return of 11.6%. 

7. Raymond James

Next on the list is the independent investment bank and financial services company Raymond James. It has delivered an average return of 8.2%. Moreover, it has a success rate of 55% based on 21,691 ratings from 162 analysts across a diverse range of sectors.

8. Stifel

Global wealth management and investment banking company Stifel features on the eighth spot of this list. The firm’s 291 analysts issued 20,870 recommendations across various sectors. Stifel has a success rate of 54%, and the firm generated an average return of 9.1%. It has been most profitable in recommending Technology sector stocks.

9. Wolfe Research

Independent sell-side research firm Wolfe Research takes the ninth spot. Its 48 analysts have a 61% success rate on over 5,432 ratings with an average return of 11%. The firm has been most profitable at recommending consumer goods sector stocks.

10. Deutsche Bank

German investment bank and financial services company Deutsche Bank is in the 10th spot. It has generated an average return of 7.3%. It has a 56% success rate on over 15,732 ratings from 346 analysts.

Bottom Line

Investors can follow the views of these top research firms to form well-informed investment decisions. Meanwhile, investors willing to see which firms come out on top using different criteria, including benchmarked against the sector, or S&P 500, no benchmark, and timeframe, can leverage TipRanks’ Top Performing Research Firms tool. 

Columbus Division of Fire Battalion Chief Steve Martin said his department received a report around 7:40 p.m. of a roof collapse on East 13th Avenue and arrived to find the roof above a front porch had collapsed while the rest of the home remained intact.

“The few people that were trapped, I believe, were probably unpinned,” Martin said. “It was like their leg was caught under some of the structure and some of the students lifted that off the students. So everybody was kind of out.”

First responders initially found 10 injured people and eventually transported 14 accident victims to area hospitals with “various states of injuries” but they all were in stable condition, Martin said.

“It appears the roof was overloaded with students,” Martin said, with estimates ranging from 15 to 45 people on a rooftop “that was not designed to have anybody on it, and it gave way.”

The names of the home owner or occupants were not immediately available.

The home is not on the property of The Ohio State University. The main campus in Columbus has an enrolled student population of 61,677 for the 2022-2023 school year, according to the university’s website.

Elon Musk expects SpaceX to spend about $2 billion on its Starship rocket development this year, as the company pushes to build on its first launch earlier this month.

“My expectation for the next flight would be to reach orbit,” Musk said, speaking during a discussion on Twitter Spaces on Saturday.

While SpaceX does secondary rounds about twice a year, to give employees and other company shareholders a chance to sell stock, Musk said the company does “not anticipate needing to raise funding” to further bolster the Starship program and its other ventures.

“To my knowledge, we do not need to raise incremental funding for SpaceX,” Musk said.

As for the dramatic first fully stacked Starship rocket launch on April 20,” the SpaceX CEO said, “The outcome was roughly in what I expected, and maybe slightly exceeding my expectations.”

Sign up here to receive weekly editions of CNBC’s Investing in Space newsletter.

SpaceX has multiple further prototypes in various stages of assembly and aims to launch the next attempt at reaching space with the towering rocket within a few months.

“The goal of these missions is just information. Like, we don’t have any payload or anything — it’s just to learn as much as possible,” Musk said.

He put the probability of reaching orbit with a Starship flight this year at “probably” 80%, but espoused that he thinks there is a “100% chance of reaching orbit within 12 months.”

Launch review

The Starship flight got off the launchpad and achieved several milestones, but Musk gave more details on a variety of the problems the rocket suffered.

The rocket took off with only 30 of the 33 Raptor engines ignited at the base of the Super Heavy booster. Musk said SpaceX “chose not to start” three engines, as they were not “healthy enough to bring them to full thrust. Starship slid laterally off the launchpad as it climbed into the sky, which Musk said was “because of the engine failures.”

About 27 seconds into the flight, SpaceX “lost communications” with another engine — an incident that happened “with some kind of energetic event” that removed the heat shield around several other engines. “Things really hit the fan” around 85 seconds into the launch, when SpaceX lost “thrust vector control” — or the ability to steer the rocket.

Additionally, Musk reported that it took about 40 seconds for the rocket’s AFTS (Autonomous Flight Termination System, which destroys the vehicle in the event it flies off course) to kick in, which SpaceX will need to correct before the next launch attempt.

The strongest part of the rocket’s performance was how well it held together, including passing through a launch milestone called “Max Q,” or the moment when atmospheric pressure is strongest on the rocket.

“The vehicle’s structural margins appear to be better than we expected, as we can tell from the vehicle actually doing somersaults towards the end and still staying intact,” Musk said.

Looking forward, Musk said SpaceX has “made so many improvements” to future prototypes. The company needs to ensure “that we don’t lose thrust vector control” with the next launch.

‘Rock tornado’

Back on the ground, Musk said the booster created a “rock tornado” underneath the rocket as it was lifting off. While SpaceX has not seen “evidence that the rock tornado actually damaged engines or heat shields in a material way,” Musk noted that the company “certainly didn’t expect” to destroy the launch pad’s concrete and create a crater in its wake.

“One of the more plausible explanations is that … we may have compressed the sand underneath the concrete to such a degree that the concrete effectively bent and then cracked,” Musk said.

A priority for the next flight will be starting the 33 Raptor engines “faster and get off the pad faster,” Musk said. It took about five seconds for SpaceX to start the engines and launch the rocket, which Musk noted “is a really long time to be blasting the pad.” The company aims to cut that time in half for the next attempt.

Photos of the aftermath have shown the violent result of the Super Heavy booster’s engines. A report from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said the launch flung concrete and metal “thousands of feet away” and created a cloud of dust and pulverized concrete that fell as far as 6.5 miles from the launch site.

On Saturday, Musk said “the pad damage is actually quite small” and should “be repaired quickly.” He estimated the needed repairs mean SpaceX will be “probably ready to launch in six to eight weeks.” SpaceX will replace some of the propellant tanks near the launchpad. The 500-foot tall tower “is in good shape,” with “no meaningful damage” even though it was struck by “some pretty big chunks of concrete.”

Musk believes the biggest hurdle to flying again “is probably requalification” of the AFTS that destroyed the rocket, since “it took way too long” to detonate.

SpaceX is moving forward with a plan to put steel plates, which will be cooled by a water system, underneath the launch tower for the next Starship rocket.

Environmental activists and researchers have raised alarms about the cloud of pulverized concrete and dust that the launch created. Musk argued that the debris was “not toxic at all,” but said that “we don’t want to do that again.”

“To the best of our knowledge there has not been any meaningful damage to the environment that we’re aware of,” Musk said.

Twitter‘s former CEO Jack Dorsey openly criticized Elon Musk’s leadership of the company in a series of social media posts Friday, writing that “it all went south” and Musk “should have walked away” from the acquisition.

Users of Bluesky, a buzzy new social media platform that is being touted as a potential alternative to Twitter, prompted the discussion. They asked Dorsey if he believed Musk was the right leader for Twitter, to which Dorsey replied, “No.”

“No. Nor do I think he acted right after realizing his timing was bad. Nor do I think the board should have forced the sale. It all went south,” Dorsey wrote. He added that he is glad new social media platforms like Bluesky are being built. Dorsey has backed Bluesky since 2019, when he was still serving as Twitter’s CEO.

Dorsey previously called Musk the “singular solution” to take over Twitter. In a tweet from April 2022, Dorsey said he trusted Musk’s “mission to extend the light of consciousness” through the platform.

But a year later, Dorsey’s opinion appears to have soured.

Musk, who is also the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, has drawn ire for his tumultuous takeover of Twitter, which he acquired for $44 billion late last year. Musk’s steep job cuts, sweeping policy and feature changes have shaken the confidence of advertisers, politicians and celebrities, among others.

Many have publicly announced their decision to leave or reduce their use of the platform, including Elton John, Jim Carrey and MTA, New York City’s public transit agency.

Soon after making a best-and-final bid to purchase Twitter for $44 billion, or about $54.20 per share, Musk tried to back out of the deal he made to buy the company.

He would have had to pay a $1 billion penalty, otherwise known as a “breakup fee,” to do so and prove to a Delaware court that he had a good reason for walking away. While Musk did take the matter to court, he ended up going through with the deal anyway.

Dorsey, who is still a Twitter shareholder, championed the deal at the time. But on Friday, he wrote that things should have gone differently. “I think he should have walked away and paid the $1b.” It is not clear that Musk, or Twitter, even had that option.

U.S. regulators have asked banks for their best and final takeover offers for First Republic by Sunday afternoon, in a move that authorities hope will calm markets and cap a period of uncertainty for regional lenders.

JPMorgan Chase and PNC are likely bidders for the ailing lender, which would be seized in receivership and immediately sold to the winning bank, according to people with knowledge of the situation. The Wall Street Journal reported those banks’ interest late Friday.

Bank of America opted not to make a final bid after being involved in earlier discussions, CNBC has learned, according to other people with knowledge of the situation.

If regulators led by the FDIC receive an acceptable offer by Sunday, it’s possible a new First Republic owner could be announced soon. That scenario would create the least disruption for First Republic customers, who would start the week knowing their bank was now owned by a financially-stable operator.

The First Republic auction may end a tumultuous period for midsized U.S. banks. Since the failure of Silicon Valley Bank in March, attention has turned to First Republic as the weakest link in the American banking system. Shares of the bank sank 90% last month, and then collapsed further this week after First Republic disclosed how dire its situation is.

Like SVB, which catered to the tech startup community, First Republic is also a California-based specialty lender. It focused on serving rich Americans, enticing them with low-rate mortgages in exchange for leaving cash at the bank. That model unraveled in the wake of the SVB collapse as First Republic clients withdrew more than $100 billion in deposits, the bank disclosed Monday.

Not a systemic risk?

As First Republic’s situation deteriorated, regulators initially cast a wide net, asking a large group of banks what they thought the company was worth, according to a person with knowledge of the process. That group has narrowed in recent days, with the idea that regulators would share information necessary to make a final bid only with the most serious contenders.

Regulators are expected to choose the bid that results in the smallest financial hit to the FDIC for resolving First Republic, according to a person with knowledge of the situation.

The SVB failure, by way of example, will cost the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund roughly $20 billion, the agency said. The biggest banks will bear the brunt of that expense, because member banks will likely be assessed fees to replenish the FDIC fund over several years.

While the emergency takeovers of SVB and Signature both involved invoking a systemic risk exception to protect uninsured depositors from losses, that probably won’t be necessary in the First Republic receivership. That’s because the new owner would presumably be able to handle deposit outflows; in the case of SVB’s receivership, it took two full weeks to announce a deal.

The big get bigger

The auction means it’s likely one of the biggest U.S. banks will grow even larger and benefit from a government-brokered receivership process that leaves the FDIC holding undesirable assets.

That’s what happened when SVB was sold to First Citizens last month; the buyer won a raft of concessions including loss-sharing agreements. First Citizens’ shares shot up 55% on news of the favorable deal.

The likely bidders are all represented in the group of 11 banks that banded together last month to inject $30 billion in deposits into First Republic. That move helped stem the larger deposit drain from midsized banks into top-four institutions including JPMorgan and Wells Fargo, thus giving regulators breathing room to resolve First Republic, CNBC reported last month.

Goldman, Wells Fargo sit out

But not every big bank that participated in the deposit injection will make an offer. Wells Fargo, Goldman Sachs and Citigroup are each unlikely to make a bid, according to people with knowledge of the banks.

Wells Fargo is still laboring under a 2018 asset cap imposed by the Federal Reserve. Goldman has made a strategic decision to pivot away from retail finance and is selling consumer loans. Citigroup has been offloading business units to simplify operations while improving its risk controls.

The takeover makes the most sense for institutions looking to grow among the coastal affluent; First Republic’s branches are concentrated in California, New York, Boston and Florida.

First Republic’s advisors had hoped to avoid a government takeover by persuading the biggest U.S. banks to help once again. One version of the plan circulated recently involved asking banks to pay above-market rates for bonds on First Republic’s balance sheet, which would enable it to raise capital from other sources.

But ultimately the banks wouldn’t bite on the last-ditch effort, leaving the government poised to end First Republic’s 38 year run.

The psychological phenomenon was originally pioneered in the 1950s but re-entered the zeitgeist a decade ago when the now popular book “Attached: The New Science of Adult Attachment and How It Can Help You Find — and Keep — Love” was released. 

Attachment theory defines four different attachment styles which offer insight into how and why we form bonds. The four types of attachment styles are: 

• Secure people feel comfortable with intimacy and are usually warm and loving
• Anxious people are often preoccupied with their relationships and tend to worry about their partner’s ability to love them back
• Dismissive-Avoidant people equate intimacy with a loss of independence and constantly try to minimize closeness
• Disorganized (Fearful-Avoidant) people are usually suspicious of others’ intentions and have a fear of being emotionally intimate 

The type of attachment style you lean toward has a lot to do with your early childhood experiences and your relationship with your parents. 

Meaning, if you want your child to have healthy relationships, you need to start that work now.

“The behavior now as a parent will start to mold what behavior your child associates with love,” says Haesue Jo, a licensed marriage and family therapist and head of clinical operations at BetterHelp.

And while no attachment style is better than another — “I don’t think people with an insecure attachment style should get a bad rep,” Amir Levine, the co-author of “Attached” told CNBC Make It last year — it would be reasonable to want your children to lean toward a secure attachment style. 

“Adults who have secure attachment styles generally can depend on their parents,” Jo says. “They enter relationships based on honesty, tolerance and emotional closeness.”

Here’s how to raise a child with a secure attachment style. 

‘Patient, warm, nurturing’

Instead of trying to identify what type of attachment style your child might be forming, focus on how you are showing up for them. 

“If you are a parent that is generally patient, warm, nurturing, caring, supportive, and empathic it makes sense for this child to grow into an adult that expects that love from a partner,” Jo says. 

On the other hand if you’re “erratic” or you only compliment or encourage your child when they are doing things that please you, they are going to associate those actions with love and look for those qualities in a potential partner. 

Someone with an anxious attachment style, for example, might have gotten very little validation from a parent. Therefore they might be constantly seeking approval from a partner and never believe they are good enough. This can be “frustrating,” Jo says. 

Pretty much every attachment style besides “secure” is “characterized by having a hard time maintaining relationships,” she adds. 

It’s not about being a perfect parent, ‘it’s about being good enough’

Many parents who want to be patient and supportive fall short because they aren’t prioritizing their own health, Jo says. 

“We put so much of ourselves in a relationship, so if we feel crappy about who we are, how can we then extend ourselves to give love to another,” she says. 

If you’re stressed and anxious, you might not be totally present for your child.

You also need to accept that there are many times when you’ll get it wrong, and that’s okay, too. 

“Most people are not 100% securely attached,” Jo says. “It’s just the nature of reality that 100% of a baby’s needs are not going to be met. Most modern parents generally cannot both be providing for a baby 24/7 and be with a baby 24/7.” 

But if you’re trying to be nurturing and accepting, your kids will see that and learn from it. 

“I hope parents understand it’s not about being a perfect parent,” Jo says. “It’s about being good enough.” 

DON’T MISS: Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

As luxury stocks make waves overseas, State Street Global Advisors believes investors should consider European ETFs if they want to capture the gains from their outperformance.

Matt Bartolini, the firm’s head of SPDR Americas research, finds three reasons why the backdrop is becoming particularly attractive. First and second on his list: valuations and earnings upgrades.

“That’s completely different than what we saw for U.S. firms,” he told CNBC’s Bob Pisani on “ETF Edge” this week.

His remarks come as LVMH became the first European company to surpass $500 billion in market value earlier this week.

Bartolini lists price momentum as a third driver of the investor shift.

His SPDR Euro Stoxx 50 ETF (FEZ) is considered a broad European ETF. The ETF is up about 20% so far this year, with a price increase of nearly 1.2% since the beginning of January.

While the fund’s top holding is LVMH at 7.29%, according to the company’s website, Bartolini contends the shift applies beyond luxury stocks and to lower-end consumer stocks.

His firm’s website lists French cosmetics companyL’Oreal — which is up almost 30% this year — as another one of his fund’s major holdings. It also shows FEZ allocating more than 20% to consumer discretionary — 2.5% higher than its second-most allocated industry.

“That’s on a broad-based level,” he said. “So, basically, buy Europe and sell U.S. has been some of the trade that we have seen.”

FEZ closed the week down 0.41% but ended the month up more than 3.1%.

Professional sports are inherently a copycat industry. From Major League Baseball’s Moneyball revolution to the NBA’s renewed focus on 3-point shooting driven by the Golden State Warriors and Steph Curry, in-season and championship success quickly becomes a blueprint for other teams to follow.

Another recent trend spreading across sports has many hoping it will also follow suit: arenas and stadiums not only adopting sustainable and environmentally friendly practices, but putting those efforts front and center for fans, players, musicians, and anyone else who enters the building.

Much like the broader world of commercial real estate, arenas, and stadiums have been slowly adopting sustainable practices over the last few decades, from recycling programs to energy efficiency efforts. But several major sports facilities across the U.S. have taken this to another level in recent years, and their operators and owners hope that the success they’ve seen across multiple fronts creates real momentum around the idea of environmentally friendly stadiums.

Mercedes Benz Stadium, home of both the NFL’s Atlanta Falcons and MLS’s Atlanta United, became the first pro sports venue in the U.S. to achieve LEED Platinum Certification in 2017. Footprint Center, home of the NBA’s Phoenix Suns and WNBA’s Phoenix Mercury, works directly with the materials science company that holds its naming rights to eliminate single-use plastic from the arena and on other sustainable practices.

The bar across sports was set even higher in 2021 when Climate Pledge Arena in Seattle opened and not only became the first net zero certified arena in the world but served as a call-to-action for Amazon’s push for companies globally to be net zero carbon by 2040.

“Venue operators are relatively quickly understanding their opportunities and their responsibilities as it related to operating more sustainability,” said Chris Granger, CEO of OVG360, a management company that works with more than 300 venues across the world ranging from arenas and stadiums to amphitheaters and performing arts centers.

“Sports teams and venues have a platform on the topic of social change, and we have the ability to shine a light on issues that matter in a way that many businesses don’t,” he said. “I think our venue operators are saying ‘Okay, we get it. Now what do we do about it?'”

The trend in sports is not dissimilar to what is being seen across other industries: a desire from businesses to be better stewards in their community and connect with the growing number of people putting an increased emphasis on environmentally friendly actions, coupled with the fact that many of these measures also have a solid business case attached to them.

When work to renovate KeyArena in Seattle began, there were many discussions on how to introduce sustainability measures not only for construction goals but also operational goals, said Seattle Kraken and Climate Pledge Arena senior vice president of sustainability and transportation Rob Johnson.

That quickly evolved into making an arena that could be a “beacon of a sustainability district,” Johnson said, which helped attract the attention of Amazon, who in 2019 co-founded the Climate Pledge initiative to have companies, organizations, and partners work together to address the climate crisis and solve the challenges around decarbonizing.

That led to what has become the Climate Pledge Arena. Its efforts include being zero-waste by using compostable containers and reducing single-use plastic use, conserving water by retaining rainwater for reuse, and not using fossil fuels in the arena for daily use – including electric-powered Zambonis for Kraken games.

Setting a zero-waste goal at Atlanta’s Mercedes-Benz Stadium

Mercedes-Benz Stadium has been on its own sustainability path since it opened in 2017, with operator Arthur Blank pushing his AMB Sports and Entertainment Group (AMBSE) executives to set a higher standard for an environmentally friendly stadium.

The stadium opened as the first LEED Platinum stadium in the U.S., but “that was just the start,” said Steve Cannon, vice chairman of AMBSE.

“Anyone can make that incremental investment into your building, but if operationally you don’t perform in a manner that’s consistent with that, you’re leaving something on the table,” Cannon said.

That has led to a focus on getting to zero-waste status, which the stadium first achieved in 2020 for an Atlanta United match, Cannon said. After an investment of about $1 million to retrofit the building and put in other measures to achieve that zero-waste consistently, the stadium has now reached that goal.

In its 2022 fiscal year, there were more than four million pounds of waste at the stadium, and more than 91% of that was diverted away from landfills, according to Andrew Bohenko, Mercedes-Benz Stadium sustainability coordinator.

That required a significant amount of education for employees and fans, and also working with vendors and other departments within the company to ensure that “there was buy-in across all our of two-million-square-foot footprint,” Bohenko said.

Ultimately, the stadium saw more than 95% compliance from fans putting trash in the right receptacles, and it projects a $400,000 yearly return on its initial investment while spending about 13 cents per guest for its overall zero-waste efforts right now. AMBSE has even created a “playbook” for other stadium operators to follow if they also want to get to zero waste.

“Everyone understands that the environment is our number one global challenge. It’s reached a level of critical mass where people have moved past greenwashing, and they’re making substantive changes to their business practices,” Cannon said. “The platform that sports represents has a disproportionate impact on our society at large, so if you think about the aggregated impact of all ballparks and stadiums across America diverting waste from landfills that’s huge, but where it becomes even more important is the power of the platform to influence other businesses – then you start to really make meaningful change.”

Johnson said Seattle’s zero-waste push has led to savings as well, as composting costs less than sending garbage to a landfill.

Reaching fans, sponsors and performers through sustainability

Another impactful revenue opportunity related to the arena’s sustainability push, according to Johnson, is reaching new fans.

“Folks under 40, who we are all cultivating as critically important fans to our success in the future, identify the environment as one of their top three global concerns,” he said. “So, we believe it’s not just the right thing for us to do for the planet, but we also think that we’re speaking to a demographic that is key to the future of the success of our industry.”

Kristen Fulmer, senior director of sustainability at OVG360 parent company Oak View Group, said while it’s clear that “sustainability can be a good business,” there still can be confusion about what that really means.

“Sustainability is kind of noisy; ESG is a catchphrase that everyone knows but doesn’t quite know the meaning of, so there are some things that we can demystify about it,” Fulmer said. “We want to help them figure out what are things that are relevant to me, my specific building, my specific market, my community, my employees, so that they can hone in on something that’s really unique.”

Granger pointed to efforts like Sacramento’s Golden One Center where the arena is powered by 100% renewable and solar energy, and Toronto’s Scotiabank Arena, where a deep-lake water cooling system utilizing nearby Lake Ontario helps keep the building cool and eliminates the need for air conditioning compressors.

Making sustainability a key part of any construction or building project is also becoming table stakes for bonds, loans, and other financial measurements, both Granger and Fulmer noted, a critical factor for many of the aging arenas and stadiums across the U.S. likely due for upgrades or full replacements in the coming decade.

It also matters more for artists and athletes. Granger said there are musicians asking for vegan or plant-based food options or asking buildings to let fans bring reusable water bottles to reduce the impact of single-use plastics.

Johnson said that when singer Billie Eilish came to Seattle to perform in 2022, her tour rider required the arena to not use single-use plastics for at least the night that she was to preform.

“That was a big inspiration for us; if Billie Eilish can come through your building and you’ll move to no single-use plastics for one night, why couldn’t you do it for the other 364 nights,” he said. Ahead of the tour date, Eilish’s mother and sustainability advocate Maggie Baird asked to tour the arena, telling Johnson and Seattle’s team that they “operationalized” the rider,” Johnson said. Seattle has given tours to numerous artists, teams, athletes and other organizations wanting to see more of the building’s practices in action.

All of these factors are pointing towards a future where sports and sustainability are more intertwined, Fulmer said.

“In the sustainability world we often say that imperfection gets in the way and creates inaction, and I think people are always really scared to not quite be perfect. In the sports world of course we all want to be perfect or always win,” she said. “Here, small wins are really important, and they’re leading to bigger wins.”

Users on the app are using beef tallow as a moisturizer for clearer skin and sharing their results. The hashtag #beeftallowskincare has hit 12 million views on TikTok.

Beef tallow is beef fat that is rendered, which means melted to reduce impurities and achieve a shelf-stable state. When cooled to room temperature, it returns to a solid form.

Several users on TikTok are praising its benefits including smoother skin and a more even skin tone. “I’ve been using it every single day for months now, and my skin absolutely loves it,” said Julia Yak, a holistic health and nutrition coach in one of her videos on the platform.

Typically, beef tallow is used in cooking oil, high-heat cooking like french fries, candles and more, says Dr. Peter C. Young, a board-certified dermatologist and medical director for Nurx Dermatology.

Now, “several online vendors are marketing beef tallow as a cure-all for dermatologic conditions, and it’s got a lot of hype on social media,” Young says.

Safety and effectiveness of beef tallow for skin care has yet to be determined

Beef tallow has ingredients that are great for skin health, including vitamins A, D, E, K and B12 which are found in many moisturizers and other skin care products, says Young.

It also contains fats that are similar in composition to sebum, the skin’s natural oil, he adds.

“That being said, it can have some of the benefits for your skin such as moisturization and anti-inflammatory properties. It can be soothing,” says Young.

Yet, beef tallow can have certain oils that will block your pores, irritate your skin and cause acne or breakouts, he adds. It’s hard to be certain that these oils won’t be in the product that you’re purchasing because beef tallow hasn’t been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for skin care use.

“The safety and effectiveness of tallow for skin care requires further research,” Young says.

“It can be hit or miss since it’s not regulated by the FDA, and you really don’t know what you’re getting. Most of the products that you’re getting are homemade or local.”

If your goal is clear skin, look for products with these ingredients

Depending on the vendor, beef tallow can cost as much as almost $40 for a small tube. But there are more effective, accessible and cheaper options, Young says.

There are specific ingredients that are great for treating acne and other skin conditions. Young suggests looking for products that include:

• Benzoyl peroxide (for acne)
• Salicylic acid (for acne)
• Azelaic acid (for rosacea)
• Ceramides (for dry skin)
• Retinol (for fine lines and wrinkles)

Either way, Young says, “you should use products that are FDA-approved and regulated, first and foremost.”

DON’T MISS: Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

Join CNBC’s Small Business Playbook virtually on May 4th, where entrepreneurs will share advice and tips on how to handle economic uncertainty, inflation and more so your business can succeed for the short-term and the long-term. Register for free today.

• Tart cherry juice is a key ingredient in TikTok’s ‘Sleepy Girl Mocktail’—but can it actually improve your sleep?
• #DBT is trending on TikTok: 4 skills from the popular type of therapy that you can practice daily

President Joe Biden’s 2024 budget proposals contain several proposals that could hit small businesses right where it hurts — their wallets.

Proposals in the budget include boosting the top capital gains rate for income over $1 million, eliminating the so-called “step-up in basis” loophole, expanding who has to pay investment income tax and at what rate, and bumping up the corporate tax rate.

“The White House’s 2024 budget proposal contains $2.5 trillion in harmful tax hikes that would crush Main Street’s ability to grow and create jobs,” said Brad Close, NFIB president, in a statement detailing its campaign to prevent the measures from becoming law. “Some of these tax increases are again being wrongly characterized as the closing of a ‘tax loophole’ and would directly hit small businesses and compound with other rate hikes,” Close said.

Although the budget comes at a time when many small businesses are feeling thrown under the bus by the effects of inflation, hiring pressures and other adverse business conditions, the good news is that tax experts are circumspect about the chances of Biden’s wish list passing as proposed. 

For one, many of the provisions within the budget have been floated before, and a divided Congress lessens the likelihood they’ll be adopted without revision. Even so, the budget represents efforts to rebalance some of the cuts enacted by The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, especially for higher income individuals, said Eric Hylton, national director of compliance at alliantgroup, a Houston-based consultancy.

Currently, the top individual rate is 37% for income over $578,125 for a single taxpayer, or $693,750 for married couples filing jointly. Biden’s proposal would boost the top individual rate to 39.6% and change the threshold to $400,000 for a single taxpayer and $450,000 for a married couple filing jointly. The rate is already set to increase at the end of 2025, when certain provisions of The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act sunset, but this proposal would make it effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2022, and it could ensnare more businesses.

While Congress may be more inclined to move ahead with measures that apply more broadly to wealthy individuals, “there’s going to be a lot of debate as to what should go forward,” said Hylton, a former IRS Commissioner of the Small Business/Self Employed Division.

it’s important for small business owners to be aware of what’s being floated, especially since certain provisions that apply more directly to business operations are likely to rear their head at a later time and the recent tax season included some ugly surprises for small businesses related to recent changes in tax law. “These ideas don’t truly go away; they just go into hibernation until somebody else comes along,” said Ray Beeman, leader of Ernst & Young’s Washington Council.

Here are five provisions business owners should be aware of in President Biden’s budget:

A higher capital gains tax rate would be bad for business sellers.

Biden’s proposal would raise the top marginal rate on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends to 44.6% for income over $1 million, up from 23.8%, including the net investment income tax. The impact would be significant for many small business owners who want to sell businesses, especially the scores of Baby Boomers who are aging out, said Brad Sprong, national industry tax leader for KPMG Private Enterprise. “They don’t have big 401(k) accounts; they have equity in the business, so selling the business could mean an even bigger hit. I think that would be tough for people and it will impact their retirement.”

Eliminating the “step-up in basis” would hit family businesses.

Biden is once again floating the idea of ending the “stepped-up basis” rule that allows preferential tax treatment for assets held until death.

Current rules exempt capital gains on assets that a taxpayer does not sell before the end of his or her life, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a non-profit, non-partisan tax policy group.

The proposed change would be especially impactful when family-business assets are passed to the next generation, since there are few exceptions to the capital gains tax consequences, according to the NFIB, which opposes the change.

“That’s a factor in families transferring businesses from one generation to the other right now,” said Mark Prater, managing director with PwC’s Tax Policy Services team. It would be a double-whammy for small businesses, he said, if the other proposal to increase the capital gains rate moves forward.

Still, Biden’s budget partially mitigates these concerns by exempting $5 million of unrealized gains per individual and effectively $10 million per married couple, according to an analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy. “The President also proposes allowing any family business (including farms) to delay the tax if the business continues to be family-owned and operated,” the blog said.

Property owners could lose leverage in real estate transactions.

The budget once again seeks to eliminate so-called 1031 like-kind exchanges of more than $500,000 for each taxpayer, or $1 million for married individuals filing a joint return. Under current law, if certain conditions are met, a property owner can sell and buy another piece of real estate for business or investment purchase and defer paying taxes on the initial gain, Sprong said. If that benefit is eliminated, certain small businesses would lose the ability to leverage their capital in this way.

A higher corporate tax rate would hurt businesses that don’t use a pass-through structure.

Biden is proposing that the corporate tax rate be increased to 28% from 21%. The majority of small businesses are pass-through businesses that are not subject to the corporate income tax, but for companies that are, the increase would be meaningful, tax experts said. Before moving ahead, Congress would need to consider how this pits the U.S. against other developed nations, Sprong said. “You wouldn’t want to be an outlier.”

Potentially higher net investment income tax.

Biden’s proposal would increase the 3.8% net investment income tax rate on small business income over $400,000 to 5%. Many small businesses today don’t pay this tax, but if the plan passes, they would not only pay, but at a higher rate than what’s currently in place, Beeman said.

Consumers are sending mixed signals.

For the most part, people are concerned about inflation and the direction of the U.S. economy. Consumer spending sank in March, according to Morning Consult. “Sticker shock” has taken a toll, the report found, with consumers more likely to walk away from a purchase because the price is too high.

However, many are still spending — and even splurging on occasion, other reports also show.  

To that point, 75% of adults said they splurged over the past month, although fewer than half said they could afford those types of purchases, according to a recent paper by Deloitte based on consumers in 23 countries.

Lipstick index is now ‘bourbon barometer’

The “lipstick index” was initially coined by former Estee Lauder chairman Leonard Lauder after the bursting of the dot-com bubble in the early 2000s sent the economy reeling. Lauder noticed that women substituted costlier luxury items for practical indulgences like lipstick.

The theory stuck: Even in tough times, consumers might rein in their spending, but they will still buy small luxuries on occasion, like a lipstick.

However, lipstick may not be the economic indicator it once was.

Deloitte’s researchers found that consumers are treating themselves, but they are now indulging differently.

More from Personal Finance: 
How to set up a budget
Why it’s important to talk about money
A recession may be coming — here’s how long it could last

“The bourbon barometer may be a more accurate reflection of these splurge behaviors,” the researchers wrote.

For starters, men are statistically as likely to splurge as women. And when they do, men shell out more. While lipsticks cost about $10, on average, adults are now spending $32, on average, on their splurges, according to Deloitte.

Further, when it comes to discretionary spending, adults are more likely to treat themselves to dinner out or premium spirits rather than cosmetics.

Consumers in the U.S. are four times more likely to have said their latest splurge purchase was food and beverages over personal care, Deloitte found.

In fact, premium spirit sales are booming.

“Despite the tough economy, consumers continued to enjoy premium spirits and fine cocktails,” Chris Swonger, president and CEO of the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, said in a statement.

“Cocktail culture continues to thrive in the United States,” Swonger said.

How to budget for experiences

To better budget for such indulgences, “always make sure you understand where you spend your money and how much is going toward needs over wants,” said certified financial planner Carolyn McClanahan, founder of Life Planning Partners in Jacksonville, Florida.

Although spending on high-end cocktails should come only after necessary expenses are covered and savings are set aside, such experiences are important, she said. Determine how much you have left over at the end of the month and designate some of those funds for going out.

“Buying stuff only brings a short-term bump in happiness but experiences bring a lot more pleasure,” McClanahan said.

But “always look for deals, too,” McClanahan added. “Go to happy hour.”

Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube.

DETROIT — After years of lackluster performance and a fire-provoked recall, the all-electric Chevrolet Bolt EV was finally gaining traction for General Motors.

As America’s cheapest EV following significant price cuts, U.S. sales of the Chevy Bolt were up more than 50% last year and the automaker said it would make a record 70,000 units in 2023.

But instead of leaning further into the vehicle’s recent success and increased production, GM CEO Mary Barra on Tuesday said the automaker would end production later this year of the vehicle she once hailed as a “real game-changer” for the industry and an “EV for everyone.”

“We have progressed so far that it’s now time to plan to end the Chevrolet Bolt EV and EUV production, which will happen at the very end of the year,” Barra told investors during an earnings call.

Barra’s comments about the vehicle getting axed were as swift as a butcher cutting the head off a chicken but spoke volumes when combined with the company’s plans to churn out profitable electric vehicles in the years ahead.

GM is on a path to deliver single-digit profits off its EV portfolio by 2025, when it aims to have a production capacity of 1 million electric vehicles in North America.

To reach those goals, GM needs the production capacity, profits and market positioning of its forthcoming next-generation EVs. It doesn’t believe it needs the Bolt.

Production predictions

To industry experts, the writing was on the wall for the Bolt’s end of days. But the timing of the decision caught many experts off guard. Expectations were GM would produce the vehicle at least into next year.

“It was more sudden than I expected,” said Michelle Krebs, executive analyst for Detroit-based Cox Automotive. “I thought it would go away at some point when new batteries came on and they went to more body styles, but it struck me as rather abrupt.”

A company spokesman said the timing of the announcement coincided with GM’s need to notify suppliers about the end of production and about progress associated with the $4 billion the company is spending to retool the Bolt plant in Orion Township, Michigan, for the GMC Sierra and Chevrolet Silverado electric pickup trucks.

It’s part of GM’s EV strategy to retool existing plants rather than building new ones, although it could do so in the future. Others such as Ford Motor and Hyundai Motor have announced new plants in addition to retooling current facilities.

GM has said retooling saves time and capital, and it’s also allowed the company the flexibility to partially convert plants and build different gas-powered models in tandem. But in the case of the Orion plant, which solely manufactures the Bolt, it didn’t make sense to take that tack, because GM believes it needs the additional capacity. Plus, the Bolt doesn’t contribute to the company’s bottom line like plants that produce money-making gas-powered vehicles.

Barra on Tuesday said once the Orion plant reopens next year, the company will have a total production capacity of 600,000 EV pickups annually, including a Detroit plant that’s been slow to ramp up production of the GMC Hummer EVs.

“We’ll need this capacity because our trucks more than measure up to our customers’ expectation, and we’ll demonstrate that work and EV range are not mutually exclusive terms for Chevrolet and GMC trucks,” Barra said Tuesday.

Profits tied to Ultium

GM has promised investors its next-generation EVs, built on a new architecture known as Ultium, would be profitable. That’s a milestone that the Bolt models, including a larger “EUV” version, never were believed to have achieved.

To spur interest and make the Bolt more affordable, GM cut the starting prices by as much as $6,300 for the 2022 model year. The Bolt EV would start at $26,595, followed by the Bolt EUV at $28,195.

“Bolt is selling better than it ever has since the company dropped the price. On the other hand, that probably also means that they’re losing more money than they ever have on that car,” said Sam Abuelsamid, a principal analyst at Guidehouse Insights. “So, they don’t want to keep it going longer. They’re losing money on it.”

GM expects to earn low to mid-single-digit adjusted profit margins on its EV portfolio in 2025, excluding any positive impact of clean energy tax credits such as those included in the Inflation Reduction Act.

Taking those credits into account, the company has said it expects its new EV portfolio to be as profitable as its cars and trucks with traditional engines by 2025 — years earlier than what many thought was possible.

While those credits likely would have boosted the profit margin on the Bolt as well, the car uses older battery technology purchased from LG, and GM is currently focused on scaling up more cost-effective in-house battery production through a plant it operates as a joint venture with the South Korean company.

That Ultium ramp-up, plus cost efficiencies achieved with the new EV pickups, means margin improvements that the Bolt couldn’t have realized, especially in the long term.

“As we scale EVs, we will lower fixed costs and will continue to drive margin improvements,” Barra said Tuesday.

Mixed reputation

The Bolt will leave behind a mixed reputation. It was the first “affordable,” long-range EV to market, but it never achieved its stated potential.

The Bolt brand name also was damaged after the company in 2020 and 2021 recalled all of the vehicles ever produced due to fire concerns resulting from defects with supplier-manufacturer batteries. At least 13 Bolts spontaneously caught fire as a result of the issue.

Still, GM touted the Bolt EV as proof of the concept for its electric-powered future. The company said the vehicles attracted new customers, with 75% of Bolt owners making the switch from non-GM vehicles.

Now, the company will need a new entry-level EV, and it’s looking to the upcoming Equinox EV, starting at around $30,000, to fill that void.

“We think this is our big opportunity here to really start to get a massive adoption, and we have that expectation with the price; the volume that we expect to do,” Scott Bell, global vice president of Chevrolet, said during a media briefing last year. “This is a game-changer for us and for the industry.”

Whether the Equinox EV, which will be produced at a plant in Mexico, can serve as more of a “game-changer” than the Bolt truly could be determined later this year when the car goes on sale.

Barra told CNBC’s Phil LeBeau last year that GM expects to ramp up production of the Equinox EV far more quickly than its current EVs. She said the vehicle should be close to full production by the first quarter of next year.

The 25-year-old is still surprised at how lucrative her small notary business has been. When she first became a notary signing agent seven years ago — just weeks after her 18th birthday — Nguyen thought it would be a temporary side hustle to support her income as a bank teller.

Notaries, or notary publics, witness and authorize the signing of important documents, like passport applications and real estate contracts. Most notary publics can only charge what their state dictates; notary signing agents, on the other hand, can charge more as they specialize in property records and loan documents. 

While Nguyen thought the bulk of her work as a notary would be spent verifying signatures and explaining documents to clients, she quickly realized there was more to notarizing than she initially thought — she was also walking people through some of the happiest, and saddest, moments of their lives.

“I’ve watched people sign the deed to their first house and contracts for a house they weren’t ready to leave … there’s a lot of tears, both happy and sad,” says Nguyen. “I realized I wanted to be the person who made people feel seen, heard, cared for and understood in those important moments.” 

Two years ago, Nguyen decided to try notarizing as a full-time career, launching her business, Team Signings, in San Jose, California, her hometown. That decision turned out to be a smart bet: In 2022, Nguyen’s business made close to $150,000, according to tax documents reviewed by CNBC Make It. 

‘You don’t have to go to college to be successful’

Nguyen’s dad, Chau, repeated the same advice to her throughout high school, as her friends panicked about their grades and having the right extracurriculars on their resumes: “You don’t have to go to college to be successful.”

“He built a career that he loved as a real estate agent, without a bachelor’s degree, and always instilled in me that I didn’t have to go to college to be successful,” says Nguyen. “I listened to him, and thank goodness I did because I didn’t know what I wanted to major in and I would have had to take out student loans … it saved me a lot of time and stress.”

Her dad was also the one who suggested she become a notary signing agent, as the notaries he worked with on real estate documents were in incredibly high demand and earning $75-$200 per signing.

In most states, you just need to submit an application and clear a background check to become a notary public, but in California, you have to take a six-hour training course, pass an exam and clear a background check. The startup costs for becoming a notary in California can range anywhere between $275 and $442, according to Notary.net.

It took Nguyen about three months to complete the process, which she finished in 2015, and another month of training and coursework to become a specialized signing agent in 2021.

After completing her certifications in 2015, Nguyen still wasn’t convinced she wanted to be a notary signing agent full-time. She quit her job as a bank teller in 2016 and for the next five years, she tried out different jobs, including short stints as a real estate agent and insurance agent — but nothing matched how much she enjoyed notarizing.

“It’s one hour of work and then you’re done, you’re free,” says Nguyen. “It’s flexible hours, and I feel like I am really making a difference in people’s lives.”

‘I work less than six hours a day’

Nguyen registered Team Signings as a corporation in November 2021 and immediately got to work building her clientele: She visited real estate agencies with a stack of business cards, made TikTok and Instagram pages to document her work as a signing agent and asked friends to spread the word about her new business.

Nguyen’s TikTok, which has almost 30,000 followers, has been her most successful marketing tool, she says. Notaries in other states have reached out with referrals in the comments, and followers near San Jose have messaged her to request her services.

She aims to do at least two signings per day, charging anywhere between $75-$200, and sometimes an even higher rate, depending on the type of document that needs to be notarized and how far the appointment is from her home office in San Jose. 

Some signings take a few minutes, while others can take over an hour. On average, Nguyen says she works “less than six hours a day.” 

“I try to keep regular hours and work between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., but I will also often take signing appointments on weekends,” she adds. Nguyen hired a full-time assistant in March to help with scheduling and billing.

Her only regret is not starting her notary business sooner.

“I love that I can set my own schedule, support myself financially and my parents if they ever need help,” says Nguyen. “All of that together, along with having the opportunity to help people every day, just makes me feel really fulfilled as a person.” 

DON’T MISS: Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

Join CNBC’s Small Business Playbook virtually on May 4th, where entrepreneurs will share advice and tips on how to handle economic uncertainty, inflation and more so your business can succeed for the short-term and the long-term. Register for free today.

Check out:

5 jobs that pay $100,000 or more and don’t require a college degree—and how to get them

CEO shares the simple exercise that helped her land her dream job: ‘You need to be vocal about what you want’

29-year-old earns $187,000 and only works 9 months a year — and his job doesn’t require a bachelor’s degree

When Google hired Oracle’s Thomas Kurian four years ago to run its cloud business, the internet search company had a clear reason for putting its trust in a career enterprise software executive.

Google was a consumer company. Despite years spent trying to compete with Amazon and Microsoft in selling cloud-based storage, computing and other services to big corporations, it was coming up short in its effort to win marquee deals.

While Google is still third in the U.S. cloud infrastructure market, its business is growing rapidly and, as of the first quarter, is finally contributing positively to Alphabet’s bottom line. Earlier this week, Alphabet said Google’s cloud unit generated $191 million in operating profit, after losing a total of $4 billion in 2021 and 2022. Revenue jumped 28% from a year earlier to $7.45 billion, far outpacing Google’s struggling ad business.

“We were not in a very good situation when I joined,” Kurian told CNBC in an interview after the results were released. “I think we were very early in the business. Most enterprises did not take us as a viable partner.”

The central problem wasn’t hard to spot. Google was a company of software developers and data scientists, who were trained at building sophisticated technologies. But they had no real idea how to build, market and sell them to the business world. Under Kurian’s predecessor, VMware co-founder Diane Greene, critics said Google’s cloud business hadn’t matured enough to handle enterprises even as it was investing heavily to do so.

The cloud division includes the Google Cloud Platform, which competes with Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure, and the Google Workspace productivity software bundle that goes head-to-head with Microsoft Office.

Kurian said he spent a lot of time with the technology in his early days to see how it worked and where it needed improvement. From 4 a.m. to 7 a.m., he would read technical design documents. In the evenings, he played with the products.

“We shifted the organization from thinking, we’re building technology to we’re building products and solutions,” Kurian said.

It’s a market Google has been committed to winning for years, as corporations have been rapidly pushing workloads from their own data centers to the cloud. Google wants to not only capture that storage and computing business but also get developers from those companies and others to use its cutting-edge technology, particularly as artificial intelligence systems gain traction.

The expansion has been costly. Almost every quarter, from the beginning of 2017 through the third period of 2020, finance chief Ruth Porat told analysts that cloud had been the biggest area of head count increases, for both sales and technical roles. Google also grew the operation through acquisitions, buying data analytics software startup Looker for $2.4 billion in 2019 and security software vendor Mandiant for $6.1 billion last year.

The cloud unit now accounts for more than 25% of Alphabet’s full-time workforce, CNBC reported earlier this year.

Kurian’s focus has included developing product road maps, introducing new pricing models, bolstering customer service and becoming more efficient with its infrastructure, a key to saving money.

“We’ve reduced cycle time in the way we provision and deploy machines by a factor of five in the last four years,” Kurian said. “There’s 100 different projects that have gone on to optimize resource consumption.”

Customer success is a practice that’s been widely adopted in the enterprise software world as a way to keep clients happy and wanting to buy more, emphasizing retention and limiting churn.

Google built up its customer-success mode to work more tightly with clients, and it racked up a community of 100,000 partners. The company has had hundreds of its senior engineers sponsor important customers so they could see how their products are being used and understand what needs to be changed.

“We have awards twice a year for teams that have done the best job helping customers,” Kurian said, adding that Google now ranks among the top five enterprise software sellers.

In 2020, Google brought its productivity tools under the brand Google Workspace. It also issued new pricing tiers, resulting in organizations of different sizes starting to pay different prices.

While Google’s cloud unit has swung to posting a profit, there’s some fuzziness in the numbers.

Last week, Alphabet restated operating income for cloud and its other segments, resulting in lower cloud losses in 2021 and 2022. The restated numbers show the cloud unit had a $186 million operating loss in the fourth quarter, compared with $480 million before the change, for example.

The cloud numbers also benefited from an extension of the useful life of data center equipment. But Kurian said competitors have made similar depreciation adjustments.

“We were always going to get to profitability,” he said. “If you draw the line, you can see the curve.”

‘Enterprise discipline’

Under Kurian’s leadership, Google’s cloud group has had to cope with its share of executive turnover. Javier Soltero, who was the head of Workspace, left in July. Rob Enslin, a former top SAP executive who joined Google as president of global customer operations in 2019, departed last year to become co-CEO of UiPath. And Kirsten Kliphouse, who was the cloud group’s president of Americas, left in 2023 after four years at the company.

But head count has continued to grow, as has the company’s roster of large customers. In the past three years, Google has signed deals with Coinbase, Deutsche Bank, Ford, General Mills and SpaceX.

And existing clients have gone deeper with Google.

Home Depot said it was adopting Google’s public cloud in 2016, while Greene was CEO. Fahim Siddiqui, Home Depot’s chief information officer, said the home-improvement retailer has found increasing value from Google’s platform since he joined from Staples in late 2018.

“He’s brought in the enterprise discipline,” Siddiqui said of Kurian. “It’s one thing to provide the capability of the cloud, a set of interesting technical capabilities. There’s a discipline of availability, reliability, management and being a proven partner on this journey.”

Siddiqui said Home Depot uses its own data centers and co-location facilities, as well as cloud services from Google and Microsoft. Google is the company’s main cloud-computing partner, he said, and last year Home Depot started moving merchandising applications to Google’s cloud.

A big partner move Kurian made in his early months as CEO involved what he called an “integrated open-source ecosystem.” It was an alliance with Elastic, MongoDB and five other companies that sell distributions of open source software.

Elastic and MongoDB shares rallied as Kurian, speaking at Google’s Next cloud conference, talked about how clients could receive a single bill while using products from other companies managed through Google’s cloud console.

“It was music to my ears,” said Dev Ittycheria, CEO of MongoDB, which sells cloud database software and services. At the time, AWS was attempting to add some open source MongoDB database software capabilities into its DocumentDB service.

Ittycheria said the open source initiative was Kurian’s idea, and he applauded how Google has arranged the partnerships. In 2021, Google said it was lowering the percentage of revenue it keeps in marketplace deals to 3% from 20%. Ittycheria said MongoDB is “very happy with the structure of the deal.”

Jeffrey Flaks, the CEO of Hartford HealthCare, which has 37,000 employees, said one reason why his Connecticut health system moved to Google Cloud Platform last year from its on-premises data centers is that other large hospitals had picked Google. He said Kurian was another factor in why it selected Google over AWS, Azure and Oracle’s cloud.

“His personal engagement, his knowledge of our intentions and our desires and, candidly, his personal problem-solving skills,” Flaks said, “distinguished Google Cloud in this process.”

Google Cloud technology chief Will Grannis said Kurian’s commitment to improving the division’s offerings was evident right away. Grannis recalled a day in late 2018, after Kurian had been picked for the role but before he’d actually started the job.

Kurian stopped by a Google office in Sunnyvale, California, and was introduced to employees. After the meeting, Grannis found himself alone in the elevator with Kurian and they rode down silently. As they walked toward the parking lot, Grannis, who was then a managing director, introduced himself, and they began talking about a container-management technology called Kubernetes.

“I’ve been trying to get some Kubernetes clusters spun up in the console, and I have some feedback,” Kurian said, according to Grannis. “I’d like to understand how we can improve the experience for developers.”

The conversation went on for an hour.

WATCH: Google Cloud has earnings power

Prebiotic soda maker Olipop is set to cross $200 million in annual sales this year, just five years after it arrived on grocery store shelves.

Founder and CEO Ben Goodwin said beverage giants PepsiCo and Coca-Cola have already come knocking. But he’s not interested in cashing out just yet.

“Right now, my focus is on blowing business through the roof,” Goodwin told CNBC.

Coke and Pepsi didn’t respond to requests for comment from CNBC.

Olipop is on target to more than double its sales this year. The startup presents itself as a healthier alternative to traditional soda but with the same familiar taste.

Olipop had raised $55.4 million as of Jan. 2, at a reported valuation of $199.8 million, according to Pitchbook data. Investors include Gwyneth Paltrow, former PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi and RXBAR founder Peter Rahal.

Goodwin estimates that roughly 10% of Olipop drinkers have replaced traditional soda entirely, but the rest swap it into their routines occasionally.

“We really are replacing that soda experience and soda occasion,” Goodwin said.

For roughly two decades, U.S. soda consumption has been falling. Americans have ditched the drinks for bottled water, flavored seltzer and other options that they view as healthier due to concerns about soda’s sugar — or sugar replacements, such as aspartame. Still, Coke and Pepsi aren’t in danger of discontinuing their namesake sodas.

“Consumers are drinking less soft drinks, but they’re still drinking a lot of soft drinks,” said Michele Scott, associate director of food and drink for Mintel’s U.S. research.

Consumers are also increasingly interested in “gut health,” one of the latest wellness trends. Matthew Barry, Euromonitor International’s insights manager for food and beverages, said the two trends — soda’s decline and gut health’s rise — have helped benefit Olipop and other similar brands, such as Poppi.

Functional soda accounts for 14% of the digestive health category, according to SPINS data.

Olipop’s formula includes nine grams of fiber and prebiotics, which are substances that help beneficial bacteria grow in the gut. Their health benefits haven’t been conclusively proven.

Rival Poppi, which was founded in 2015 and has also seen its sales accelerate over the last year, infuses its soda with apple cider vinegar, which contains prebiotics. Both Olipop and Poppi have leaned into influencer marketing on TikTok, where gut health became a trending topic last year.

In February, Olipop’s root beer overtook Keurig Dr Pepper’s A&W as the best-selling root beer at an unspecified top U.S. retailer, according to Goodwin. He takes it as another sign of Olipop’s potential, since root beer was one of the first flavors it started selling.

“My hope is that as other [flavors] in the system mature as well and get higher distribution and customer familiarity, we may be able to repeat this type of story with a range of different flavors,” he said.

Goodwin said he formulated the root beer himself and remains the company’s top formulator, leaning on his “super tasting” ability, thanks to taste buds that are more sensitive than the average person’s.

He dropped out of college at age 20 to help his friends start a kombucha company.

From there, he founded Obi probiotic soda with Olipop co-founder and Diageo alumnus David Lester. They sold Obi in 2016. They started working on Olipop’s formula the following year.

Despite its success, Olipop is still in the early stages of growth, with a retail footprint of just 20,000 locations and only 12 flavors. After launching first in natural food grocers in the Bay Area, it’s expanded to mainstream chains such as Target and Kroger. Its expansion in the Midwest helped fuel its soaring sales last year, Goodwin said.

Olipop’s skyrocketing sales have coincided with soaring prices across the grocery store. The price index for food at home increased 8.4% in March compared with a year earlier, according to Labor Department data.

Coke and Pepsi have raised their prices by double-digit percentages over the last year, saying the price hikes are necessary to mitigate inflation. The duopoly has seen mixed reactions. In the first quarter, Pepsi’s North American beverage business saw its volume fall 2%, while Coke’s North American drinks unit reported flat volume.

But even with Coke’s and Pepsi’s higher prices, Olipop is still the more expensive choice. A 12-ounce can of Olipop costs $2.49 at a Target store in New York City — the same price as a 20-ounce bottle of Pepsi.

“The challenge for Olipop and beverages like it is the premium price point right now during a time of inflation,” Euromonitor’s Barry said. “There is certainly a group of consumers who can afford to buy high-priced sodas regularly but that’s a limited subset of the population.”

But Olipop’s Goodwin is confident that consumers are willing to pay more for the drinks he formulates. He said that soda trails only coffee in its price inelasticity, meaning that consumers are willing to pay more.

The billionaire entrepreneur and investor says his follower count on the social media platform is declining by 800 to 1,000 each day, and that his tweets are reaching “considerably” fewer people than they did a few months ago.

And his experiment to fix the problem — paying for Twitter Blue, which costs $8 per month, to give his account the blue checkmark it used to sport for free — isn’t working.

“I figured I was/am on some Twitter s— list that doesn’t show me to new or existing users as a possible follow,” Cuban told CNBC Make It in an email. “I thought maybe, by paying the annual contract, that would change. It didn’t.”

Normally, Cuban wouldn’t care about his online follower count, he added — he has 8.8 million Twitter followers, as of Friday evening — but it matters at the moment, as he’s trying to spread the word about his online pharmacy Cost Plus Drugs.

The topic has been on Cuban’s mind for at least a few weeks. Last month, he asked Twitter CEO Elon Musk in a tweet for suggestions on how to “retain or grow” his follower count. Musk didn’t reply, at least publicly.

Cuban’s theory of a “Twitter s— list” centers around the idea that Twitter shadow-bans some users, altering the platform’s algorithm so those accounts’ tweets are less visible on other people’s timelines.

In December, Musk tweeted Twitter was “working on a software update” where users would be able to see if their accounts were shadow-banned or not. Twitter, which has yet to unveil that feature, didn’t immediately respond to CNBC Make It’s request for comment.

“We’re rapidly improving transparency & fairness on this platform, but there is still a lot of work to do,” Musk tweeted on Monday.

Another potential explanation for Cuban’s drop in followers and reach: Twitter could be getting less popular.

Musk has also complained about his posts getting fewer likes and retweets than usual, and allegedly fired a software engineer for offering the explanation that “public interest in his antics is waning,” Platformer reported in February.

But Cuban’s criticism of Twitter doesn’t stop with his own account. Last week, he tweeted that the company’s new “approach to legacy checks is a huge mistake,” after Twitter removed countless blue checkmarks from previously verified accounts and gave them to subscribers only.

The act damaged the blue checks’ value by making them both less exclusive and less credible, Cuban suggested.

“There were 100 ways [Musk] could have asked legacy checks for $100,” Cuban wrote. “Egalitarianism was the worst of them all.”

Disclosure: CNBC owns the exclusive off-network cable rights to “Shark Tank,” which features Mark Cuban as a panelist.

DON’T MISS: Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

Join CNBC’s Small Business Playbook virtually on May 4th, where entrepreneurs will share advice and tips on how to handle economic uncertainty, inflation and more so your business can succeed for the short-term and the long-term. Register for free today.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

The dust has settled in Texas, but the work to clean up after the world’s most powerful rocket and get the next one flying in a matter of months is already underway.

Elon Musk’s SpaceX launched its fully-stacked Starship for the first time a little over a week ago. While the nearly 400-foot-tall vehicle flew for more than three minutes — achieving several milestones for a rocket of unprecedented scale — Starship also lost multiple engines during the launch, caused severe damage to the ground infrastructure and ultimately failed to reach space after the rocket began to tumble and was intentionally destroyed in the air.

Sign up here to receive weekly editions of CNBC’s Investing in Space newsletter.

As NASA Administrator Bill Nelson told the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology on Thursday that SpaceX “blew a hole in that launchpad.”

The company hopes to launch another Starship rocket as soon as June or July, but that timeline depends on a variety of factors, including repair work, regulatory signoff and the readiness of its next prototype.

Launch site damage

The highest hurdle to a second launch attempt may be the daunting cleanup. 

Soon after the launch, SpaceX began the process of cleaning up the launchpad and assessing the damage to its infrastructure. Photos taken by onlookers have shown the violent result of the Super Heavy booster’s engines, which carved a crater into the ground and smashed debris into the launch tower, nearby tanks and other ground equipment.

“I have asked, so I can report to you, that as of today SpaceX is still saying that they think it will take at least two months to rebuild the launchpad and concurrently about two months to have their second vehicle ready to launch,” NASA chief Nelson told lawmakers Thursday, providing the most recent update on the company’s timeline for returning to flight.

The space agency has a vested interest in the success of Starship, as NASA gave SpaceX a nearly $3 billion contract in 2021 to use the rocket to land astronauts on the moon as part of the Artemis program.

SpaceX leadership repeatedly said before the launch that not blowing up the launchpad would be considered a success for the first launch. But the infrastructure still took a hit. In a series of tweets after the launch, Musk described significant damage to the concrete launchpad the company had built and said he hoped that the rocket hadn’t too heavily damaged the mount that supports it before launch.

“All that’s left of the concrete lateral support beam is the rebar!” Musk said.

The company CEO added that it was “still early” in SpaceX’s analysis, but surmised that “the force of the engines when they throttled up may have shattered the concrete, rather than simply eroding it.” When SpaceX briefly tested the booster’s 33 Raptor engines ahead of the launch, Musk said “the engines were only at half thrust,” which avoided tearing a hole in the ground previously.

One potential solution: Musk said SpaceX is “building a massive water-cooled, steel plate to go under the launch mount.” He said the plate was not “ready in time” for the first attempt and admitted that the company “wrongly thought” that the concrete would withstand the launch.

Regulatory review

SpaceX’s launch license from the Federal Aviation Administration was a long-awaited final step to getting Starship off the ground, which makes the regulator’s investigation into this first flight a key overhang to the second one.

The Starship test flight triggered reviews from the FAA, which is effectively the lead federal regulator on the SpaceX rocket program. As is standard with a launch “anomaly,” such as this midair explosion, the FAA began an investigation into the flight and its fallout. The move grounds future Starship launches until it closes the investigation and clears SpaceX to move forward under the license the regulator gave the company earlier this month.

“A return to flight of the Starship/Super Heavy vehicle is based on the FAA determining that any system, process, or procedure related to the mishap does not affect public safety,” the agency said in a statement on April 20, the day of Starship’s launch and subsequent explosion. 

Additionally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service disclosed this week that the Starship launch started a 3.5-acre fire on land owned by Texas’ Boca Chica State Park. FWS did not find dead wildlife on the local refuge lands, which are a habitat for endangered species, but found that the rocket’s destructive force flung concrete and metal “thousands of feet away” and created a cloud of dust and pulverized concrete that fell as far as 6.5 miles from the launch site.

‘Hardware rich’

One piece of SpaceX’s second attempt is already largely in place: the production pipeline for another Starship prototype. 

The company had planned to launch the first Starship and Super Heavy booster flight as early as summer 2021, but president and chief operating officer Gwynne Shotwell said recently that the inaugural flight was delayed in part because the company was focused on developing “the production systems that will build the ship.” The company has expanded its “Starbase” facility steadily over the past few years. 

Thanks to the many enthusiasts who livestream every minute of SpaceX’s work in South Texas, it’s apparent the company has as many as 10 further Starship prototypes in various stages of assembly, as well as up to seven more Super Heavy boosters.

Nelson touted as much before members of Congress, explaining how the company approaches rocket development differently than the space agency.

“Now understand that the explosion, that’s not a big downer in the way SpaceX does things. They are hardware rich, meaning they’ve got a lot of those rockets ready to go, and that’s their modus operandi — they launch, if something goes wrong they figure out what it is, they go back and they launch it again,” Nelson said. 

As with any rocket-development program, and especially the largest ever assembled, SpaceX’s timeline for the next Starship flight is likely to evolve and change.

The small overall uptick is significantly less than the 13% jump the Defense Department saw in 2021, but it’s overshadowed by the fact the Air Force, the Navy and the Marine Corps all had more reports last year than the previous year.

Because the Army is much larger than the other three services, its 9% drop in reported sexual assaults last year drove the overall military increase down. That large decrease comes a year after Army leaders saw a nearly 26% jump in reports involving soldiers — the largest increase for that service since 2013.

The Air Force saw the largest increase in reported assaults during the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, at 13%, while the Navy had a 9% jump and the Marine Corps went up by about 4%.

Overall, there were more than 8,942 reports of sexual assaults involving service members during the 2022 fiscal year, a slight increase over the 8,866 the year before.

The Pentagon and the military services have come under increasing criticism and pressure from members of Congress to reduce sexual assaults and harassment in the military. The services have long struggled to come up with programs to prevent sexual assaults and to encourage reporting, including a number of new initiatives over the past year.

Defense officials have long argued that an increase in reported assaults is a positive trend because so many people are reluctant to report them, both in the military and in society as a whole. Greater reporting, they say, shows there is more confidence in the reporting system, greater comfort with the support for victims, and a growing number of offenders who are being held accountable.

Nate Galbreath, acting director of the Pentagon’s sexual assault prevention and response office, said the department is using a budget infusion of $479 million this year to hire as many as 2,400 personnel for a new “prevention workforce.” He said about 350 have already been hired and as the number grows they will be placed in military installations around the world to help commanders address some of the risk factors that lead to sexual assault.

“This is the first time in the 15 years that I’ve been working this issue for the Department of Defense that I have a fully funded and fully staffed way forward,” he told The Associated Press. “I think this is the thing that’s going to allow us to really address this. Everybody needs to hold us accountable. They need to watch this space, and we will make good on our promise to address this.”

It’s unclear whether the latest increase in reports represents a growing problem or whether those who say they were assaulted were just more willing to come forward.

While the military has made inroads in making it easier and safer for service members to come forward, it has had far less success reducing the assaults, which have increased nearly every year since 2006. And Army leaders, as an example, have acknowledged that issues such as sexual assaults, suicides and other problems have an impact on recruiting. All of the services have been struggling to meet recruiting goals.

Asked about the latest report, Heather Hagan, an Army spokeswoman, said Thursday that “while encouraging, we know the Army has much more work to do to prevent sexual assault and sexual harassment.”

Army officials were alarmed as they saw the growing numbers last year and began trying to implement new programs, and by late fall they said that some changes were starting to work.

They said one change involved a training program that soldiers get when they report to their first duty station. It is rolled out right away, and it has soldiers acting out dangerous situations and emphasizes training on how to respond.

The Army officials also said they were beefing up evaluation programs that grade unit leaders, including randomly picking peers and others to do the assessments.

Galbreath said the rate of sexual assault in the military is about the same as that of the civilian population. But he acknowledged that, “everyone expects more from the military — that when they send their son or daughter off to serve their nation, we have an environment that allows dignity and respect, and everyone has a chance to serve without fear of having to experience a sexual assault.”

Galbreath also noted that in December the military will begin using independent attorneys to review and prosecute sexual assault cases, rather than unit commanders. That change was forced by members of Congress who believed that some commanders were biased or were opting not to prosecute or punish their troops, and as a result victims were reluctant to come forward.

According to the Pentagon report, the number of Air Force sexual assault reports increased from 1,701 in 2021 to 1,928 last year, while the Navy went from 1,883 to 2,052, the Marine Corps went from 1,201 to 1,244 and the Army decreased from 4,081 to 3,718.

The Pentagon releases a report every year on the number of sexual assaults reported by or about troops. But because sexual assault is a highly underreported crime, the department also does a confidential survey every two years to get a clearer picture of the problem. The most recent survey was released last year, so it won’t come out again until next year.

Food and consumer goods stocks are poised to keep running, Jim Cramer said Friday, at least if no external news drags down the entire market. 

The resilience of snack and packaged-goods stocks will hold particularly true as debt-ceiling talks flounder, he added. 

In that context, a few snack stocks have proven “remarkably inelastic,” Cramer said, and in his mind, these are ones to buy as people take comfort in well-known brands like Oreos, Colgate and Campbell Soup, amid uncertain times. 

“People aren’t abandoning these brands despite gigantic price hikes put through because of Covid-generated shortages of all sorts of businesses,” Cramer said. “It’s defied many of the analysts who thought consumers would balk. They haven’t, which is fabulous for the stocks because the analysts got it wrong.”

Toblerone maker Mondelez hit a new 52-week high Friday after posting first-quarter results that exceeded expectations on the top and bottom lines. 

Colgate-Palmolive also rallied following an earnings report that topped revenue expectations. The company also raised its annual sales forecast, noting solid demand for its pet nutrition products. 

Cramer also saw the same promise in General Mills, which hit a new 52-week high Friday, and Procter & Gamble, which beat earnings and revenue expectations last week. 

“Even as these consumer-packaged good stocks have run a great deal, I don’t think it’s too late,” Cramer said. “I think they can continue to beat and raise numbers for some time to come.”

Sign up now for the CNBC Investing Club to follow Jim Cramer’s every move in the market.

Disclaimer

Questions for Cramer?
Call Cramer: 1-800-743-CNBC

Want to take a deep dive into Cramer’s world? Hit him up!
Mad Money Twitter – Jim Cramer Twitter – Facebook – Instagram

Questions, comments, suggestions for the “Mad Money” website? madcap@cnbc.com

California regulators on Friday voted to ban the sale of new diesel big rigs by 2036 and require all trucks to be zero-emissions by 2042, a decision that puts the state at the forefront of mitigating national tailpipe pollution.

The California Air Resources Board unanimously approved the Advanced Clean Fleets rule, the state’s second zero-emissions trucks rule and first in the world to require new commercial trucks, including garbage trucks, delivery trucks and other medium and heavy-duty vehicles, to be electric.

Supporters of the rule say it will improve public health in marginalized communities that have endured polluted air while mitigating the effects of climate change. The mandate is estimated to deliver $26.5 billion in public health benefits in California in avoided health impacts and deaths due to diesel pollution. 

Heavy-duty trucks represent nearly one third of the state’s nitrogen oxide and more than one quarter of its fine particle pollution from diesel fuel, according to the California Air Resources Board While medium and heavy-duty trucks are just 10% of the vehicles on the country’s roads, they emit 25% of the greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit. 

“Frontline communities across California who breathe in deadly diesel pollution every day can finally get some relief with the Advanced Clean Fleets rule,” said Andrea Vidaurre, senior policy analyst for the People’s Collective for Environmental Justice. “There is no acceptable level of exposure to deadly diesel pollution — so it has got to go, for the sake of our health and our lungs.”

Some of the country’s major truck manufacturers and their lobbying groups have strongly opposed the regulations, arguing that requirements are costly as electric models are more expensive than diesel trucks. Large trucks are more expensive to convert to electric models than smaller vehicles due to their size and weight.

The trucking industry has also said that the deadlines are unrealistic given the lack of EV charging infrastructure and available space at ports.

The mandate would require companies that operate 50 or more trucks to convert their fleets into electric or hydrogen models and achieve zero-emissions by 2042.

The earliest deadline is for drayage trucks, which carry cargo to and from major ports, which must be converted to electric models by 2035, while new sales starting in 2024 must be zero-emissions. Vehicles like garbage trucks and school buses must be zero-emissions by 2027.

California had sought waivers from the Clean Air Act to set stricter standards than the federal government for heavy-duty vehicles. The state’s stricter tailpipe emissions rules will have broader effects beyond California — which has significant authority over the U.S. auto industry — and could pave the way for other states to follow suit.

For instance, New York, New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts, Vermont, and Colorado have already adopted the California’s Advanced Clean Trucks rule.

The state has committed to achieving 100% renewable energy by 2045. Last year, it banned the sale of new gasoline-powered cars starting in 2035. Today’s mandate also comes a day after the state adopted a historic rule to limit emissions from diesel-powered trains.

Even after a pandemic challenged workplace norms, it seems like some corporations are determined to deliver their employees back into a world of lengthy all-hands or workshops.

But being tied up in meetings all day is not only frustrating. It can also limit productivity. 

Robert I. Sutton, an organizational psychologist and professor at Stanford University, has a counterintuitive solution if you find yourself stuck in a pointless meeting: just leave. 

He does this, he says, at least once a week: “I’m a big believer in walking out of things.” 

Sutton is also the co-author of the upcoming book “The Friction Project: How Smart Leaders Make the Right Things Easier and the Wrong Things Harder.”

“I’ve got something to get to.”

There are many instances where you’re not needed and when your time would be better spent doing something else. 

If this is the case, Sutton says you can excuse yourself in a polite way that doesn’t invite any questions. 

“Just smile and say ‘I’ve got something to get to,'” he says. 

Growing up, we are taught to endure some obligations. 

“In school we learn to sit in our place until the end of class and you can’t leave unless you have some incredibly dramatic excuse,” he says. 

While this mindset is useful for kids, it might not serve you as an adult. 

“A lot of times we treat life like we are on an extended flight in the middle seat and there is no way we can get out,” he says. 

Of course, there are some professions where leaving a situation is not an option. “I don’t want an anesthesiologist to walk out on me mid-operation,” he says.

But if your leaving won’t hurt anyone, why not duck out?

DON’T MISS: Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

Join CNBC’s Small Business Playbook virtually on May 4th, where entrepreneurs will share advice and tips on how to handle economic uncertainty, inflation and more so your business can succeed for the short-term and the long-term. Register for free today.

A recent report by Goldman Sachs laid out some stark possibilities when it comes to AI and the economy. The report estimates two-thirds of jobs in the U.S. and Europe, and around 300 million positions worldwide could be exposed to automation from new AI advances. The report also notes that one-fourth of all work being done could be replaced by generative AI.

“The interaction between humans and AI will become more and more prevalent as we move forward,” said Georgios Petropoulos, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Initiative on the Digital Economy. “Then we will see that they can be really good because they can increase our productivity or efficiency, we can be much more productive in the tasks we are doing.”

Watch the video above to find out more about how AI could change the future of work

Carl Icahn on Friday called Illumina’s first-quarter results “very disappointing” and slammed the DNA sequencing company’s new plans to cut costs. 

The activist investor, who owns a 1.4% stake in Illumina, is in a heated proxy fight with the company over its 2021 acquisition of cancer test developer Grail.

Icahn and Illumina have been trading jabs for more than a month. 

Icahn is seeking seats on Illumina’s board of directors and pushing the company to unwind the Grail acquisition. He is also calling for the San Diego-based company to oust CEO Francis deSouza “immediately.”

Illumina on Tuesday reported quarterly revenue and earnings that topped Wall Street’s expectations.

But the company also posted net income of $3 million for the quarter, which was down more than 96% from the $86 million it raked in during the same period a year ago. 

In an open letter Friday to Illumina shareholders, Icahn accused deSouza of “desperately, hilariously and, most of all, unsuccessfully” trying to spin the “decidedly mediocre” quarterly results during a press tour this week.

Icahn pointed to deSouza’s interview on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Wednesday, when the CEO touted strong demand for Illumina’s diagnostic testing services.  

“Illumina CEO Francis deSouza seems to believe that he can fool all of the people all of the time,” Icahn wrote. 

“Those not skilled in deciphering doublespeak might actually get the impression that Illumina was doing well!” he added.

Icahn also said that the price of Illumina shares fell the more its CEO during this week, “clearly signaling dissatisfaction with the earnings report and dissatisfaction with Mr. deSouza’s transparent attempt to put lipstick on a pig.” 

Illumina’s stock is down more than 9% since the company reported earnings. Shares were largely flat Friday after Icahn released his letter.

In that missive, Icahn also took shots at cost-cutting plans Illumina unveiled to improve its shrinking margins. He called those measures “vague” and “extraordinarily unambitious.”

The company on Tuesday said it will enable unnamed “activities” in more cost-effective areas of the world and will use its new NovaSeq X sequencing system to accelerate genomic discoveries, among other efforts. 

Those plans will help Illumina reach its adjusted operating margin goals of 24% in 2024 and 27% in 2025, the company said in its earnings release. 

Icahn called those margin targets “less than modest.” And he argued that they will “take years to realize, if they are achieved at all.” 

The company has projected an estimated 22% operating margin for 2023, down from the 23.8% it reported in 2022.

Illumina reported a negative operating margin of 5.7% for the quarter, down from 15% during the same period a year ago. The company’s gross margins for the period fell to 60.3%, down from 66.6% in the first quarter of 2022.

Illumina did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Icahn’s letter.

Criticism of Grail deal

Elsewhere in his letter, Icahn slammed deSouza’s positive remarks this week about Illumina’s $7.1 billion acquisition of Grail.

DeSouza had told CNBC the deal “makes sense” because Illumina can significantly expand the market for Grail’s early screening test for different types of cancer.

The CEO also touted Grail’s 100% revenue growth during the quarter compared with the same period a year ago. 

But Icahn said the deSouza failed to tell the public about an opinion issued earlier this month by the Federal Trade Commission, which said that the deal would stifle competition and innovation. 

The FTC also ordered Illumina to divest itself of the acquisition over those concerns. 

The European Commission, the executive body of the European Union, also blocked the deal last year over similar concerns.   

Illumina is appealing both orders and expects final decisions in late 2023 or early 2024.

Last week, a U.S. federal appeals court said that it will fast-track its review of Illumina’s challenge of the FTC order.

Icahn’s resistance to the acquisition stems from Illumina’s decision to close the deal without getting approval from those antitrust regulators.

Earlier this month he strongly criticized Illumina and its management for finalizing the “reckless deal,” calling it “a new low in corporate governance.” 

Illumina has urged shareholders to reject Icahn’s three board nominees during its annual shareholder meeting scheduled for May 25. 

As investors navigate another uncertain year in markets, actively managed funds could add differentiated performance to their portfolios – if traders choose carefully. 

Actively managed funds have historically underperformed passive strategies, but 2022 was a better year than most for stock pickers. Only a slight majority of large-cap equity fund managers lagged their benchmarks last year, according to S&P Global’s SPIVA U.S. Scorecard. The firm noted that it was the lowest underperformance rate for the category since 2009. 

To be sure, that’s hardly a ringing endorsement. Investors can easily rack up high fees, as well as capital gains taxes, that make many actively managed funds a poor alternative to passively managed strategies that can mimic a benchmark at a lower cost. 

Still, actively managed funds can have a better chance of outperforming during periods of volatility. Plus, they beat passive strategies in some lesser-ventured categories for investors besides U.S. large caps, according to S&P’s research. 

One actively managed exchange traded fund called JPMorgan Premium Equity ETF (JEPI) has a 9.59% yield, driving investor interest in the ETF. It currently has more than $7 billion in inflows this year, according to FactSet data.

For Jennifer Bellis, private wealth advisor at U.S. Bank Wealth Management, it depends on what the investor is trying to accomplish. Actively managed funds can help diversify portfolios, but investors will have to do their due diligence, she said.

“It’s more about looking for the right manager and the right strategy,” Bellis said. 

Here’s how investors should go about deciding whether they should include actively managed funds in their portfolio – and what they should look for when deciding.  

A good track record is key

For investors evaluating actively managed strategies, a manager’s track record is the first place to start. A strong record of performance going back three, five and 10 years can show you how the funds and their methodologies have performed across different market cycles – especially when different investing styles have fallen in and out of favor. 

“Everyone can have an up year,” Bellis said. “So what you want to do is research the fund, the manager, and look for a track record. Ideally, a 10-year history look back is what you’re looking for.” 

Investors can also review managers and their teams, as well as their tenures at the fund. They can also give the fund’s holdings a careful review to assess how the choices stack up against their benchmarks. A fund that mirrors an index too closely may not generate any differentiated alpha, and may look like passive investments. 

Also, even successful managers can have a down year, as past performance is not necessarily an indicator of future success. 

Look for lower fees

Of course, investors will have to evaluate whether an actively traded fund is right for them. 

For newer, lesser capitalized investors, passive instruments could give them the opportunity to build wealth at a far lower threshold to entry – instead of the typically higher fees and capital gains taxes, as well as the research, that come with active managers. 

Actively managed funds typically charge an expense ratio between 0.5% and 1%, but the cost can climb even higher than 1.5%, according to Investopedia. Meanwhile, passive index funds average about 0.2%. Other charges that could be tacked on include 12b-1 fees that are marketing costs. 

“Those fees aren’t necessary,” Bellis said. “So, you want to make sure that you’re reviewing the prospectus to make sure that you don’t have those front- and back-load fees because there’s plenty of funds that don’t have them. There’s no reason to pay for them.”

Check for diversification

Investors will also have to evaluate where they want to apply active strategies in their portfolio, such as emerging markets or small caps. 

“Those markets are so broad, and there’s so many ideas within them that I think an active manager who is following those markets and looking through fundamentals can exploit some of the inefficiencies or find interesting ideas,” said Kathy Carey, director of asset manager research at Baird. 

Of note, small caps had the lowest underperformance rate last year among U.S. equities, according to S&P Global’s scorecard. Just 40% of active funds in domestic small caps underperformed.

Carey also said investors seeking exposure to more specific emerging markets ideas outside of China might have better luck with an actively traded strategy, Baird’s Carey said. 

Other interesting strategies within actively managed funds include long-short and total return strategies, according to Bellis. A long-short strategy is favored among hedge funds that seek to take bets on favored stocks, while betting against stocks that could fall. A total return strategy focuses on generating income for investors. 

Baird’s Carey said investors can evaluate where active strategies could add differentiation to their portfolios. 

“Active managers, again, have the opportunity to try to figure out where the market is going.” Carey said. 

When it comes to cryptocurrency like bitcoin, new investors are often motivated by friends to take the plunge, according to a new study.

But that might hold traps for the unwary, experts warn.

“I don’t imagine friends are talking about when they lost money,” said Lee Baker, a certified financial planner and founder of Apex Financial Services in Atlanta.  

“The sexy sells,” added Baker, a member of CNBC’s Advisor Council. “The upside sells.

“But folks don’t talk about the downside,” he added.

Nearly a third — 31% — of new cryptocurrency investors in 2022 used a friend’s suggestion as their primary reason for buying in, according to a recent joint study published by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Investor Education Foundation and NORC at the University of Chicago. Friends’ recommendations were the No. 1 motivating factor for new crypto buyers.

That share compares with 8% of new investors in more traditional assets like stocks and bonds.

The disparity indicates there is “a social element to cryptocurrency investing not evident in equities or bond investing,” according to the study.

This isn’t to say a friend’s recommendation is necessarily a poor reason to buy into the digital assets.

But it can be a “double-edged sword,” said Gary Mottola, research director at the FINRA Investor Education Foundation and a co-author of the report.

On one hand, crypto can be an on-ramp to more traditional investing — which is generally a good outcome, Mottola said. There’s some evidence of this happening: 36% of new crypto investors said their purchase made them more interested in investing in the stock market, the study found.

However, “the friends recommending [crypto], the sources of information on social media, may not be reliable,” Mottola said.

Trust but verify

The fear of missing out can be a powerful driver of investment decisions.

Bitcoin and other crypto assets rallied through 2021, a record year for the digital assets. Bitcoin jumped from roughly $10,000 in the summer of 2020 to a peak above $68,000 by November 2021.

But the tide turned quickly during a so-called “crypto winter,” when investors lost more than $2 trillion in the year following the market peak.

Celebrities, like actress Lindsay Lohan and the rapper Soulja Boy, were recently fined by the Securities and Exchange Commission for undisclosed endorsements of various cryptocurrencies.

“Unless they’re some legitimately knowledgeable financial person, trust but verify,” Baker said of information you may hear from friends or from “pseudo experts” on social media.

One of the dangers of following a friend’s advice: Investors may not understand the risks and volatility associated with crypto (or other investments), or how it fits within a broader, well-diversified investment portfolio, he said.

Another potential trap: You may be getting a friend’s recommendation when the market is nearing its top, when much of the growth potential has already been realized.

Bitcoin’s current value around $30,000 is nearly double what it was at the beginning of 2023. Baker expects he may soon be fielding more phone calls about crypto if the trend continues.

“If you’re doing some investigation [about crypto], I think it’s great,” Baker said. “If you’re just taking information blindly without doing any investigation, that’s a horrible idea.”

The U.S. House of Representatives on Friday voted to repeal President Joe Biden’s suspension of tariffs on solar panels from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, nations that collectively represent a majority of country’s supply of panels.

The decision comes after the White House last year waived tariffs on solar panel imports from the Southeast Asian nations for two years and invoked the Defense Production Act to bolster domestic solar panel manufacturing.

The tariff moratorium was imposed to keep solar panels coming into the country as the U.S. boosts capacity. Solar energy is a key step toward reaching the White House’s climate goals.

The president had issued the moratorium amid a Commerce Department probe into whether companies were circumventing tariffs on Chinese shipments of solar products to the U.S. Commerce was looking at a complaint alleging that eight solar companies manufacture solar cells and components in China, then send those cells and modules to Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam for “minor processing” before exporting them to the U.S. The department preliminarily found that four of the eight companies were attempting to bypass U.S. duties by doing minor processing in one of the Southeast Asian nations.

Supporters of the House resolution argue that the country is too dependent on other nations like China for clean energy and should enforce trade laws that will support country’s domestic solar supply chains.

The House passed the resolution in a 221-202 vote, with 12 Democrats joining most Republicans to vote in favor. The legislation now facesreview by the Senate. The president has pledged to veto congressional efforts to repeal the solar tariff waiver. A veto could only be overturned with a two-thirds Senate majority.

If the two-year moratorium is lifted, U.S. solar developers could face a total of $1 billion in retroactive tariffs, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. The legislation could also eliminate 30,000 jobs and $4.2 billion in domestic investment, the group estimated.

Abigail Ross Hopper, SEIA’s president and CEO, said in a statement that the U.S. can’t produce enough solar panels and cells to meet demand, and the remaining months of Biden’s moratorium provides the country time to close that gap.

“The United States can get there and become a global leader in clean energy manufacturing and development,” Hopper said. “Overturning the moratorium at this stage puts that future at risk.”

The Biden administration has unveiled plans for solar energy to supply nearly half of the country’s electricity by 2050, which is part of its broader goal to achieve an emissions-free grid by 2035 and a zero-carbon energy system by mid-century.

“The attempt to impose retroactive tariffs on U.S. companies would harm current progress and once again cede ground to China and other nations,” American Clean Power Association CEO Jason Grumet said in a statement.

— CNBC’s Pippa Stevens and Reuters contributed to this report.

Well, here we are again, with House Republicans, Senate Democrats and the White House locked in a to-the-death struggle over raising the debt ceiling again or defaulting on U.S. bills.

The fight, which raged on in 2011, caused turmoil in financial markets — the stock market in particular — and led to the first debt downgrade in U.S. history. The Dow dropped 5.5% on Aug. 8, 2011, posting its sixth largest decline in history as the U.S. approached default.

Rather ironically, investors bought U.S. Treasury bonds, even after S&P downgraded U.S. debt for the first time ever, because a simultaneous European sovereign debt crisis was deemed more of a risk than a U.S. default. This time around, there is no such distraction that would make U.S. bonds more appealing than weaker paper across the pond.

These games of chicken, debt ceiling battles, government shutdowns and other styles of brinksmanship do nothing to engender goodwill between the world’s biggest borrower and its biggest individual, institutional and international lenders.

While one assumes cooler heads will prevail and the debt limit will be raised, without any mandated spending cuts, as happened three times during the Trump administration, one still needs to worry that this could be a “burn it all down” moment in which there is no agreement, and a “technical default” takes place.

This would leave the U.S. unable to pay Social Security, or other mandated bills, or even miss an interest payment on its outstanding debt. This would be uncharted territory. And potentially, seismic.

The U.S. Treasury said tax receipts in April totaled nearly $130 billion, well above year-ago levels. This could push off the day the big bill comes due until July, rather than June.

Still, that day is fast approaching with no sign that House Republicans will agree to increase the debt limit without a commitment to cut several hundred billion dollars in annual discretionary spending. The White House remains unwilling to negotiate over a House-passed plan that guts veteran benefits, food stamps and other social programs.

This would be tedious and funny if it were not so repetitive and didn’t affect real lives and the safety and security of U.S. debt, which is effectively a repository of funds for all manner of investors who believe in the “full faith and credit” of the United States government.

On the one hand, the White House is right to refuse to play a game that would force the U.S. to default on borrowing already authorized and spent.

If I were President Joe Biden, I would indeed play hardball on this issue. I would point out that Republican administrations have contributed more than half of the nation’s debt pile and have raised the debt limit without any strings attached routinely when their party occupied the White House.

On the other hand, given a debt-to-GDP ratio that exceeds 100%, the U.S. should re-examine its budget priorities and find ways to reduce annual deficits and bring the national debt under control.

Of course, that is easier said than done.

Among defense spending, entitlement spending and interest on the national debt (now considerably higher given the recent and steep hikes by the Federal Reserve), there is not much to cut that would make a dent in the debt.

Were the U.S. not so polarized politically, raising the future retirement age for the likes of Social Security and Medicare would make sense as millennials and Gen Z are likely to see their life expectancy rise dramatically in the decades ahead.

A small hike in the retirement age, from today’s 67 years to 70, would save trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities and help the U.S. bring future spending under control.

It’s as an unpopular idea here as raising the retirement age to 64 is in France, but as the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles Commission report showed, some 15 years ago, it’s a necessity given the future unfunded liabilities of the U.S. government.

That, by the way, is the trade I would make if I were Biden. I would seek a permanent hike in the debt limit, so the bills will be paid on time, and then follow the recommendations of Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles. While their proposal may be forgotten today, it is no less relevant than in years gone by.

Their recommendations were fair and square, calling for defense budget audits, modest increases in entitlement eligibility and public investments in productivity-enhancing programs from education to infrastructure. Some of that has been done in the years since, but more is necessary.

Throw away the notion of minting a trillion-dollar platinum coin to fund our obligations.

Stop fighting a losing game. Give Alan and Erskine a call.

It’s our only way out.

— Ron Insana is a CNBC contributor and a senior advisor at Schroders.

The billionaire investor and owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks recently took to Twitter to air his grievances and present ideas, after the platform removed blue checkmarks from countless previously verified accounts.

Cuban wrote that Twitter CEO Elon Musk botched a marketing opportunity, and could have gotten more users to pay for Twitter Blue’s $8 monthly subscription if he’d offered more incentives. “There were 100 ways [Musk] could have asked legacy checks for $100,” Cuban wrote. “Egalitarianism was the worst of them all.”

When rolling out the subscription service, Musk removed blue checkmarks from previously verified users, and made them available to anyone willing to pay. By doing so, he dampened their value, Cuban suggested: Verification is now less exclusive, credible and, in turn, less desirable.

Cuban says he’s currently paying for a Twitter Blue subscription as an experiment, after his follower count and reach “declined considerably over the past few months.”

“I thought maybe by paying the annual contract, that would change,” Cuban tells CNBC Make It. “It didn’t.”

In March, 2.6 million people visited Twitter Blue’s sales page, according to internet traffic analyst Similarweb. Just 116,000 of them, less than 5% of that traffic, actually purchased a subscription that month, Bloomberg reported.

Twitter didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

In another recent tweet, Cuban wrote that Twitter’s new “approach to legacy checks is a huge mistake.” He offered a few solutions, which he posed as smarter ways to make money selling the blue checkmarks. For $100 per year, he wrote:

• A Twitter artificial intelligence system could monitor impostor celebrity accounts for you
• Twitter could promote $10,000 worth of tweets from a nonprofit of your choice
• Your tweets could have unlimited characters

Cuban’s $100 figure is roughly equivalent to the $96 that Twitter Blue users would pay in a year.

Twitter rose to prominence as a place where anyone could interact with anyone, and verified sources could keep people updated in real-time. Musk’s implementation of Twitter Blue could make both elements harder for many users, particularly when they’re no longer sure who they’re actually speaking with.

But despite acknowledging Twitter’s shortcomings, Cuban isn’t retreating from the platform. In another recent tweet, he called Twitter “unique and right now irreplaceable,” and expressed hope that the social media giant could reclaim its former power and popularity.

“Twitter still is the best game in town for so many different types of communications,” Cuban wrote. “If you look at Twitter on a 20 [year] horizon, the past [six months] are just the preseason and it’s not hard to recapture what was.”

This story has been updated to reflect Mark Cuban’s comments on his own Twitter Blue subscription.

Disclosure: CNBC owns the exclusive off-network cable rights to “Shark Tank,” which features Mark Cuban as a panelist.

DON’T MISS: Want to be smarter and more successful with your money, work & life? Sign up for our new newsletter!

Join CNBC’s Small Business Playbook virtually on May 4th, where entrepreneurs will share advice and tips on how to handle economic uncertainty, inflation and more so your business can succeed for the short-term and the long-term. Register for free today.

This story uses functionality that may not work in our app. Click here to open the story in your web browser.

First Republic — Shares of the regional bank fell by 50% after sources told CNBC‘s David Faber that the most likely outcome for First Republic is to be taken into receivership by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporate. However, there is still hope for a rescue deal to occur before the regulator would step in, the sources said.

Snap — The Snapchat parent company cratered about 18% after missing revenue expectations for the recent quarter. Snap’s revenue fell 6% from a year ago.

Amazon — The company fell 3.8% as investors contend with concerns over the future of Amazon’s cloud business. The company beat expectations on both adjusted earnings per share and revenue on Thursday.

Intel — Intel shares rose more than 4% even after the company reported its largest quarterly loss on record and a 133% reduction year over year. Even so, Intel reported a smaller-than-expected loss per share and better-than-expected revenue. Benchmark upgraded the chipmaker, saying the worst is priced into shares.

Pinterest — Pinterest’s stock plunged more than 17% after sharing disappointing second-quarter guidance. The move in shares came despite the image-sharing company’s beat on the top and bottom lines.

Charter Communications – Shares popped 8% after Charter Communications topped revenue expectations for the previous quarter, boosted by solid gains within its internet segment.

First Solar — The solar energy company’s stock plunged 14% after its first quarter results fell short of expectations. First Solar posted 40 cents earnings per share on revenues of $548 million. Analysts had estimated $1.02 earnings per share on revenues of $718 million, according to Refinitiv data.

Chevron — The energy stock rose 0.8% after the company beat expectations for first-quarter earnings and revenue. The strong results were boosted by its refining business, which helped offset a decline in oil and gas production amid a slide in oil prices.

Exxon Mobil — The stock gained about 2% after the oil giant posted a record first-quarter profit before the bell, despite the pullback in oil prices.  Exxon Mobil’s adjusted earnings per share was $2.83, beating the $2.59 expected by analysts polled by Refinitiv. Its revenue of $86.56 billion also came in above the $85.41 billion expected. 

Colgate-Palmolive — The consumer giant saw its stock rally 4% after the company reported quarterly earnings and revenue that topped expectations. Colgate also raised annual organic sales forecast, seeing consistent price increases and solid demand for its pet nutrition products.

T-Mobile — The telecommunications stock slid 3.1% after first-quarter revenue disappointed expectations, according to Refinitiv. T-Mobile US reported revenue of $19.63 billion, lower than the $19.82 billion estimate.

Bloomin’ Brands — The Outback parent added 2.9% after its earnings report came in ahead of analyst expectations. The company reported 98 cents in earnings per share, above the 89 cents expected by analysts polled by Refinitiv. Revenue came in at $1.24 billion, slightly ahead of the $1.22 billion anticipated.

Alteryx – Shares of the data analytics firm tumbled about 17% after the company posted revenue for the first quarter that came in just below analysts’ expectations, according to FactSet, and projected a wider-than-expected loss for the second quarter. Alteryx also announced an 11% cut in its headcount.

Newell Brands — Shares gained 2% even after the consumer goods company reported a wider-than-expected loss. Revenue topped Wall Street’s expectations.

— CNBC’s Yun Li, Alex Harring, Brian Evans, Jesse Pound, Hakyung Kim, Sarah Min, Tanaya Macheel and Michelle Fox contributed reporting

Tech investors are eager to hear how much industry leaders are bolstering profitability now that they’re in cost-cutting mode.

But there’s one area where they also want to see hefty investments: artificial intelligence.

Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon and Meta all reported quarterly results this week, updating Wall Street on their efforts to improve efficiency as economic concerns mount. When it comes to AI and the latest boom in so-called large language models (LLMs) that power products like ChatGPT, the mega-cap tech companies can’t afford to get left behind.

Generative AI programs use increasing amounts of data and processing power to produce outputs that seem like they were made by a human — a block of text, a snippet of code, or a computer-generated image. They require specialized supercomputers that aren’t cheap.

On their earnings calls this week, tech CEOs talked at length about the potential for AI, whether they’re building their own models or rapidly integrating it into products. The common theme was their emphasis on the large sums of money they’ll be spending to build and run these applications.

Here’s what executives from Alphabet, Microsoft, Amazon and Meta told analysts:

Alphabet

Sundar Pichai, Alphabet’s CEO, is under intense pressure to deliver AI products due to the perceived threat that the company’s core Google search engine faces from the sophisticated chatbots hitting the market. The company recently declared an internal “code red.”

Pichai said on Tuesday’s earnings call that the company was making “good progress” towards its AI goals.

“We’ll continue to incorporate generative AI advances to make search better in a thoughtful and deliberate way,” Pichai said.

He said Google is using AI to improve the conversion rate of ads and reduce the amount of “toxic text” that goes into AI models. The company is also combining two primary AI teams, Brain and DeepMind.

Pichai said that in addition to using its own homegrown chips to power its models, it’s using processors from Nvidia, which makes the vast majority of graphics chips used to train and deploy cutting-edge AI.

Microsoft

Microsoft is using OpenAI’s GPT technology in its Bing search engine, Office, and Teams teleconferencing system.

CEO Satya Nadella says that AI will eventually drive revenue growth and is already sparking increased uptake in the company’s apps. Bing, for example, has seen downloads quadruple since Microsoft added a chatbot, he said. Microsoft has generated over 200 million images through its Bing integration.

Nadella warned that a significant amount of capital will be required to build out the massive datacenters needed to run AI applications.

“We will continue to invest in our cloud infrastructure, particularly AI-related spend, as we scale to the growing demand driven by customer transformation,” Nadella said. “And we expect the resulting revenue to grow over time.”

Amazon

Amazon CEO Andy Jassy gave an unusually lengthy response on Thursday to an analyst’s question about the company’s generative AI plans.

Jassy said Amazon is building its own LLMs, and designing data-center chips for machine learning, emphasizing that the market is massive.

“These large language models, generative AI capability, has been around for a while. But frankly, the models were not that compelling until about six to nine months ago,” Jassy said. “They have gotten so much bigger and so much better so much more quickly that it really presents a remarkable opportunity to transform virtually every customer experience that exists.”

Jassy also said Amazon’s size would allow it to become one of a handful of companies building LLMs, which can take hundreds of computers running for weeks, overseen by expensive machine learning engineers.

“There will be a small number of companies that want to invest that time and money and we will be one of them at Amazon,” Jassy said.

Unlike Microsoft and Google, Amazon’s focus is selling access to the technology through its Amazon Web Services division. However, Jassy said Amazon will work on some applications, such as programs to help engineers write code.

“Every single one of our businesses inside of Amazon are building on top of large language models to reinvent our customer experience,” Jassy said. That includes voice assistant Alexa, he said.

Meta

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg tried to dispel the notion that his company is no longer focused on the metaverse after turning his attention in that direction in late 2021.

But he wanted investors to know that Meta can invest in metaverse technologies while simultaneously putting tons of resources into AI, which he called a “key theme” for his company.

Zuckerberg said that while the company has used machine learning to deliver recommendations and power products like Facebook’s news feed or ad systems, a new main area of focus is generative foundation models.

“It’s been a pretty amazing year of progress on this front, and the work happening now is going to impact every single one of our apps and services,” Zuckerberg said.

He said the company would work on a variety of products using the technology, including chat experiences in WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger, tools for making images for posts on Facebook and Instagram, and eventually programs that could spit out entire videos from short descriptions.

A concept he’s particularly excited about is “AI agents,” which often refer to AI programs that can carry out goals.

“There’s an opportunity to introduce AI agents to billions of people in ways that will be useful and meaningful,” Zuckerberg said. One possibility for an AI agent would be to handle customer service for businesses, Meta has said.

Zuckerberg discussed the company’s big investments to build out its datacenters for AI applications. He said the technology was the “main driver” of Meta’s growth in capital expenditures over the past few years.

“At this point we are no longer behind in building out our AI infrastructure,” Zuckerberg said.

That doesn’t mean Meta is done buying graphics processors. Zuckerberg said the company would need to “continue investing,” but would do so after it launches its generative AI products and gets a better grasp on the resources required.

WATCH: Big beat for Amazon

For many Americans, a comfortable retirement may feel out of reach.

Retirement confidence has dropped significantly in 2023, marking the biggest decline since 2008 among both workers and retirees, according to a new report from the Employee Benefit Research Institute and Greenwald Research.

Workers’ confidence dropped to 64% from 73% in 2022. Meanwhile, retirees’ confidence slipped to 73% from 77%.

Two key reasons for the drop are a lack of savings and historic high inflation that is pushing up prices, the survey found.

More from Personal Finance:
GOP senator touts ‘big idea’ Social Security funding fix
Experts argue Social Security retirement age should not pass 67
The return on waiting to claim Social Security is ‘huge’

To remedy that, the general advice is to try to set aside more money — though admittedly that is not always easy.

But there are also several key decisions retirees face that, when handled properly, can help save more money. Here’s a look at four of them:

1. Claiming Social Security benefits

• Key deadline to watch: By age 60, you should go to the Social Security Administration website and review your statement, recommends Craig Copeland, director of wealth benefits research at EBRI.

When to claim Social Security retirement benefits is one of the big questions retirees face.

Most experts generally recommend waiting beyond age 62, the earliest eligibility age. At full retirement age — 66 or 67, depending on your date of birth — you will receive 100% of the benefits you earned. But for every year you delay past full retirement age up to age 70, you will get an 8% boost — a guaranteed return that’s hard to beat in the markets or elsewhere.

It’s important to note that those benefits are also inflation-adjusted, unlike most other sources of income, explained David John, senior strategic policy advisor at the AARP Public Policy Institute.

“The later you can file for Social Security, the better it is as far as the amount you’re going to get,” John said.

By your early 60s, you should be reviewing your earnings record to make sure it’s correct, Copeland said, as that is what will be used to calculate your benefits.

At that time, you will also be able to get a sense of how large your monthly benefit check will be if you claim at ages 62, 67 (provided that’s your full retirement age) and 70.

2. Coming up with a Medicare strategy

• Key deadline to watch: Your 65th birthday.

While you may start your Social Security retirement benefits at age 62, eligibility for Medicare generally does not start until age 65.

An initial enrollment period starts three months before you turn 65, includes your birth month and goes three months after the month you turn 65 — for a total of seven months.

That goes for Medicare Part A, which covers inpatient hospital care, skilled nursing facility care, nursing home care, hospice care and home health care, as well as Medicare Part B, which covers diagnostic and preventive care services.

A small portion of people may be automatically enrolled if they are already receiving Social Security benefits, noted Jane Sung, senior strategic policy advisor at AARP Public Policy Institute.

For others, their 65^th birthday, and the surrounding months that make up their initial enrollment period, are a key date to watch.

“Don’t wait until the last week of your initial enrolment period, because it is complex,” Sung said.

If you’re still working and have health-care coverage through an employer, you may decide not to sign up right away when you turn 65, she said.

Those who opt for traditional Medicare may also want to add Medigap plans, which can help cover out-of-pocket costs, or Medicare Part D, for prescription drug coverage.

Alternatively, people may opt for Medicare Part C, otherwise known as Advantage plans, which are offered through private insurance and include Medicare Parts A and B, and oftentimes other coverage areas.

To help sort through the choices, the AARP offers a Medicare enrollment guide and other resources.

State Health Insurance Assistance Programs, also known as SHIP, also provide guidance to Medicare beneficiaries.

In addition, some people may qualify for financial help through Medicare savings programs if they have income or resources below certain limits.

The key is to be proactive and do your research.

“Certainly, I think six months, four months before your 65^th birthday is a great time to start thinking about learning more about Medicare and the different choices available out there,” Sung said.

3. Deciding where you will live

• Key deadline to watch: The sooner, the better.

When it comes to lifestyle, many retirees would prefer to age in place. Yet it’s important to consider whether your current home will still suit you as you age, notes EBRI’s Copeland.

When it comes to preparing a strategy for where to live in retirement, the sooner, the better, he said.

“Once you have any mobility issues, you really need to be moving on it,” Copeland said.

If you plan to relocate, you may want to do it early before health issues set in, he said.

Alternatively, if you plan to age in place, making some upgrades now, like putting guardrails or handrails on stairs, may help smooth the transition if and when your health declines.

To be sure, finding a place to live in retirement won’t look the same for everyone, noted Susan Reinhard, senior vice president and director of the AARP Public Policy Institute.

Notably, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. While some people may downsize, others may want more room to accommodate grandchildren. “It’s called right sizing for you,” Reinhard said.

While deciding where to live, people would also be wise to make other provisions for their care, including establishing or updating advance directives, legal documents that express your wishes in the event you are no longer able to care for yourself.

It’s also helpful to create medical records, and to have conversations with family members who you would want to help in the event you need medical attention, Reinhard noted.

4. Saving more

• Key deadline to watch: Check in at least 10 years away from retirement.

For many people, the idea of retirement doesn’t become a reality until around age 45, according to David John of AARP Public Policy Institute.

By the time you’re about a decade away from retirement, it’s a good idea to give some serious thought to your retirement goals while you’re still working and have time to build up your savings and make other arrangements, he said.

Even so, no matter where you are in relation to retirement, you can still make progress.

“If you don’t have retirement savings at this point, it’s never too late to start,” John said. “Having any level of savings is better than having no savings at all.”

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., urged a top U.S. judge in Texas to reform his district’s case-assignment rules that he says have allowed plaintiffs to effectively “hand-pick” their preferred judges.

Schumer’s demand to Chief Judge David Godbey of U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas came after a heated legal battle over the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of an abortion pill sparked accusations of conservative litigants engaging in “judge shopping.”

Multiple court divisions in Godbey’s district have just one or two district judges. The rules currently allow for plaintiffs to target those divisions for civil cases — letting them “effectively choose the judge who will hear their cases,” Schumer said Thursday in a letter to Godbey.

“Unsurprisingly, litigants have taken advantage of these orders to hand-pick individual district judges seen as particularly sympathetic to their claims,” Schumer wrote.

The Senate leader called Texas itself the “most egregious” offender, noting that in 29 lawsuits against the Biden administration, it has “always sued in divisions where case-assignment procedures ensure that a particular preferred judge or one of a handful of preferred judges will hear the case.”

Congress may “consider more prescriptive requirements” if Godbey does not enact reforms, Schumer wrote.

The most prominent recent example of alleged judge shopping came in the clash over the abortion pill mifepristone. The case was filed in Amarillo, Texas, a federal court division with just one judge: Matthew Kacsmaryk, an appointee of former President Donald Trump who has expressed socially conservative views on LGBTQ rights and abortion.

By filing the lawsuit in Amarillo, the anti-abortion groups seeking to cancel the FDA’s approval of the drug virtually guaranteed Kacsmaryk would hear their case. Kacsmaryk ruled in favor of those groups, temporarily suspending the drug’s approval. The case quickly ascended to the U.S. Supreme Court, which last week ordered that the pill remain broadly available as further litigation plays out.

Critics say the strategy of targeting single-judge divisions harms the integrity of the court, as it effectively bypasses the usual process of having cases assigned randomly. The random-assignment process is intended to “avoid judge shopping,” federal courts note.

“In the past few years, the country has seen the downside of allowing plaintiffs to hand-pick their desired judges,” Schumer said in a press release Thursday.

“The result? Chaotic and flawed rulings on abortion access, LGBTQ+ protections, legal immigration, and climate legislation,” he said. “Our country cannot afford to let these practices continue unchecked – wherever they may occur.”

In his letter to Godbey, Schumer noted, “Nothing requires the Northern District to let plaintiffs hand-pick their judges like this.”

The district’s split into seven divisions is intended to reduce travel times in the sprawling area, which encompasses more than 96,000 square miles.

“Particularly with electronic filing, that division does not need to affect judicial assignments at all,” Schumer argued. “Other district courts with many rural divisions divide civil cases randomly between all their judges, regardless of where the case is filed.”

He noted that the Western District of Texas changed some case-assignment rules last year, “apparently in response to forum-shopping concerns.”

Godbey’s district should make a similar change for all its civil cases, Schumer wrote.

He conceded that courts can set their own rules for how they assign cases.

“But if that flexibility continues to allow litigants to hand-pick their preferred judges and effectively guarantee their preferred outcomes, Congress will consider more prescriptive requirements,” he wrote.

Shortly after the Supreme Court makes its expected ruling on the Biden administration’s sweeping student debt forgiveness plan, the loan bills are expected to resume.

The U.S. Department of Education has said payments would be due again 60 days after the litigation over its student loan forgiveness plan resolves. If the legal issues over the administration’s relief are still unfolding by the end of June, or if it’s not allowed to move forward with forgiving student debt by then, payments will pick up at the end of August.

Getting used to a student loan payment again — the average bill is around $400 a month — will likely not be easy for many borrowers. The bills have been on hold, after all, for more than three years.

More from Personal Finance:
How new grads can better their odds of landing a job
Here are the first moves to make if you lose your job
How to understand your financial aid offer

Still, there are steps you can take to be more prepared, experts say.

Know your lender

During the pandemic, a number of the largest companies that service federal student loans announced they’ll no longer be doing so, meaning many borrowers will have to adjust to a new servicer when payments resume.

Three companies that serviced federal student loans — Navient, the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (also known as FedLoan) and Granite State — all said they’d be ending their relationship with the government.

As a result, around 16 million borrowers will have a different company to deal with by the time payments resume, or not long after, according to higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz.

Double-check that your servicer has your current contact information, so that you receive all the notices about the upcoming change, experts say.

Impacted borrowers should get multiple notices, said Scott Buchanan, executive director of the Student Loan Servicing Alliance, a trade group for federal student loan servicers.

If you mistakenly send a payment to your old servicer, the money should be forwarded by the former servicer to your new one, Buchanan said.

Find an affordable repayment option

Many people’s lives have been changed by the pandemic. If your circumstances look different than they did three years ago, it may make sense to review the payment plans available to you and find one that’s the best fit for your current situation.

In the meantime, the law has also changed.

Student loan forgiveness is now tax-free until at least 2025, thanks to a provision included in the $1.9 trillion federal coronavirus stimulus package that President Joe Biden signed into law in March of 2021. That policy will likely become permanent.

That may make income-driven repayment plans more appealing, since they often come with lower monthly bills and borrowers will likely no longer be hit with a massive tax bill at the end of their 20 years or 25 years of payments.

But if you can afford it, the standard repayment plan is just 10 years.

To calculate how much your monthly bill would be under different plans, use one of the calculators at Studentaid.gov or Freestudentloanadvice.org, said Betsy Mayotte, president of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors, a nonprofit.

If you do decide to change your repayment plan, Mayotte recommends submitting that application with your servicer before payments turn back on.

“I have significant concerns that there will be some big servicing delays,” she said.

Have a plan if you can’t make payments

If you’re unemployed or dealing with another financial hardship, you’ll have options when payments resume.

First, put in a request for the economic hardship or the unemployment deferment, experts say.

Those are the ideal ways to postpone your federal student loan payments because interest usually doesn’t accrue under them, as long as they’re subsidized undergraduate student loans.

If you don’t qualify for either, though, you can use a forbearance to continue suspending your bills. But keep in mind that interest will rack up and your balance will be larger – sometimes much larger – when you resume paying.

A former Apple employee who swindled the company out of more than $17 million with a scheme that double-billed for parts was sentenced to three years in federal prison and ordered to pay nearly $33 million, prosecutors said.

Dhirendra Prasad pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud and conspiracy to defraud the United States in 2022.

Prasad, 55, of Mountain House, California, worked at Apple from 2008 to 2018 as a buyer in the company’s Global Service Supply Chain unit. Along with two co-conspirators, who owned two companies that were Apple suppliers, Prasad conspired to double-bill Apple for parts it already owned or had purchased.

Prasad said the scheme began as far back as 2011. It netted him more than $17 million and ran for eight years. Prasad also engineered “sham invoices” that allowed one of his co-conspirators, Don Baker, to take unjustified tax deductions valued at more than $1.8 million.

“Prasad was given substantial discretion to make autonomous decisions to benefit his employer,” federal prosecutors and Internal Revenue Service investigators said in a statement Wednesday. “Prasad betrayed this trust, and abused his power to enrich himself at his employer’s expense.”

In addition to his prison sentence, Prasad will forfeit $5.5 million worth of assets, pay a money judgment of $8.1 million, and restitution of $17.4 million to Apple and $1.9 million to the IRS.

Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Silicon Valley Bank’s dramatic failure in early March was the product of mismanagement and supervisory missteps, compounded by a dose of social media frenzy, the Federal Reserve concluded in a highly anticipated report released Friday.

Michael S. Barr, the Fed’s vice chair for supervision appointed by President Joe Biden, said in the exhaustive probe of the March 10 collapse of SVB that myriad factors coalesced to bring down what had been the nation’s 17th-largest bank.

Among them were bank executives who committed “textbook” failures in managing interest rate risk, Fed regulators who failed to understand the depth of SVB’s problems and then were too slow to react, and a social media frenzy that may have accelerated the institution’s demise.

Barr called for broad changes in the way regulators approach the nation’s complex and interwoven financial system.

“Following Silicon Valley Bank’s failure, we must strengthen the Federal Reserve’s supervision and regulation based on what we have learned,” he said.

“As risks in the financial system continue to evolve, we need to continuously evaluate our supervisory and regulatory framework and be humble about our ability to assess and identify new and emerging risks,” Barr added.

A senior Fed official said increased capital and liquidity might have helped SVB survive. Central bank officials likely will turn their attention to cultural changes, noting that risks at SVB were not thoroughly examined. Future changes could see standardized liquidity requirements to a broader range of banks, and tighter supervision of compensation for bank managers.

Bank stocks were higher following the report’s release, with the SPDR S&P Bank ETF up about 1.3%.

In a stunning move that continues to reverberate across the banking system and through financial markets, regulators shuttered SVB following a run on deposits triggered by liquidity concerns. To meet capital requirements, the bank was forced to sell long-dated Treasury notes at a loss incurred as rising interest rates ate into principal value.

Barr noted that SVB’s deposit run was exacerbated by fear spread on social media outlets that the bank was in trouble, combined with the ease of withdrawing deposits in the digital age. The phenomenon is something that regulators need to note for the future, he said.

“[T]he combination of social media, a highly networked and concentrated depositor base, and technology may have fundamentally changed the speed of bank runs,” Barr said in the report. “Social media enabled depositors to instantly spread concerns about a bank run, and technology enabled immediate withdrawals of funding.”

He used a broad brush in discussing the Fed’s failures, not mentioning San Francisco Federal Reserve President Mary Daly, under whose jurisdiction SVB sat. Senior Fed officials, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to speak frankly, said regional presidents aren’t generally responsible for direct supervision of the banks in their districts.

Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said he welcomed the Barr probe and its internal criticism of Fed actions during the crisis.

“I agree with and support his recommendations to address our rules and supervisory practices, and I am confident they will lead to a stronger and more resilient banking system,” Powell said in a statement.

SVB was a darling of the tech industry as a place to turn to for high-flying companies in need of growth financing. In turn, the bank used billions in uninsured deposits as a base for lending.

The collapse, which happened over the matter of just a few days, sparked fears that depositors would lose their money as many of the accounts were above the $250,000 threshold for Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. insurance. Signature Bank, which used a similar business model, also failed.

As the crisis unfolded, the Fed rolled out emergency lending measures while guaranteeing that depositors wouldn’t lose their money. While the moves have largely stemmed the panic, they spurred comparisons to the 2008 financial crisis and have led to calls for reversing some of the deregulatory measures taking in recent years.

Senior Fed officials said changes to the Dodd-Frank reforms helped spur the crisis, though they also acknowledge that the SVB case also was a failure of supervision. A change approved in 2018 reduced the stringency of stress testing for banks with less than $250 billion, a category in which SVB fell.

“We need to develop a culture that empowers supervisors to act in the face of uncertainty,” Barr wrote. “In the case of SVB, supervisors delayed action to gather more evidence even as weaknesses were clear and growing. This meant that supervisors did not force SVB to fix its problems, even as those problems worsened.”

Areas the Fed is likely to focus on include the types of uninsured deposits that raised concerns during the SVB drama, as well as a general focus on capital requirements and the risk of unrealized losses that the bank had on its balance sheet.

Barr noted that supervisory and regulatory changes likely won’t take effect for years.

The General Accountability Office also released a report Friday on the bank failures that noted “risky business strategies along with weak liquidity and risk management” that contributed to the collapse of SVB and Signature.

Correction: The General Accountability Office also released a report Friday. An earlier version misstated the name of the agency.

Options trading is booming. It’s also complicated — and if you don’t know what you are doing, you can lose big.

Options essentially allow you to bet on whether you think an asset is going up or going down. You can buy or sell option contracts and implement various strategies. In March alone, the Options Clearing Corporation cleared 1.1 billion contracts, up 12.2% year over year. It was the highest total volume month in the organization’s history and the first time cleared contract volume surpassed 1 billion contracts in a single month. 

However, many people aren’t necessarily approaching options trading the right way. 

“So many investors take a ‘ready, fire, aim’ approach, which is not the right way to do it,” said Randy Frederick, managing director of trading and derivatives for the Schwab Center for Financial Research.

In other words, they aren’t doing their homework before pulling the trigger on an options contract.

That said, done the right away options can complement your portfolio, especially during times of market volatility. They can be used to generate income when the market is moving sideways or as a hedge to reduce the risk on an existing stock position.

Getting started

Before you start buying options, understand the lingo and how the contracts work.

“Get educated. You need to know what you are doing with strikes, with how things expire,” said Scott Elisha, lead options strategist and wealth advisor at Perigon Wealth Management.

The good news is there are plenty of resources available. Brokerage firms, like Schwab, have explainers on their websites, as does the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Cboe’s Options Institute also has an options 101 course.

Understanding the basics

A call and a put are the most common types of options contracts.

A call option gives the buyer the right to buy shares of an underlying stock at a certain price — called a strike price — for a specified period of time. So if you think the price of a stock will move higher, you would buy a call option. If you sell a call option, you believe the price will go down or stay stable.

A put option gives the holder the right to sell shares of an underlying stock at a predetermined price before the contract expires. If you believe the stock will go down, buy a put option. You can also sell a call option if you think the price is headed lower. If you sell a put option, you are betting shares will rise.

While the buyer has a choice on whether to buy or sell the asset before the expiration date, the seller is obligated to sell or buy the asset if the buyer exercises his or her contractual right on or before the options expiration date.

“When you buy an option, you know the maximum amount of money you are putting to work and the maximum amount of money you could potentially lose,” explained Chris Murphy, co-head of derivative strategy at Susquehanna Financial Group.

“When you sell an option, you open yourself up to more risks,” he said. “For example, the risk to being short a call is, in theory, limitless because there is no actual limit on how high a stock can go.”

There are also costs involved. Investors pay to execute an options contract. The price, known as a premium, is determined by several factors, including the value of the stock, the strike price, volatility and expiration date. For instance, larger implied volatility translates to higher option prices.

Your first options trade

Your very first options trade should be a covered call, said Schwab’s Frederick.

A covered call is when the trader sells someone the right to purchase a stock that he or she already owns. If you have at least 300 to 500 shares of a company, have owned them for a while and they are worth more than what you paid for them, the strategy is a good way to “dip your toe into options,” he said.

Sell one call against 100 shares of that position, Frederick advised. Set the price a little bit higher than where it currently sits and have the contract expire in about a month or two, he said.

“Then you don’t have to do anything. Just sit tight. This is how you learn about how options work,” Federick added.

There is also minimum risk involved, he said. If the stock goes down, you’ll have lost the money anyway by owning the equity, he said. If the stock shoots higher, you may have given up a little bit of profit but will still make money on the rest of the shares you hold. If the stock goes sideways, you made no money on the stock but a little on the options, he said.

“The amount of downside is so little compared to the potential benefit,” Frederick said.

Perigon’s Elisha also likes covered calls for his portfolio, as well as his clients.

“The thing about selling covered calls is you do limit the upside,” he said. You also need to be comfortable with the strike price you select.

“If you bought a stock at $100 and sell a $110 call and stock goes to $120, you are missing out on that $10 of upside,” he explained.

Of course, there are other, more complex strategies available, including a multi-leg strategy that combines multiple options.

“Don’t assume that a more complex multi-leg strategy is better,” Frederick said. “It is different and it gives you potentially more flexibility.”

“Sometimes the simplest strategies are the best ones,” he added.