Blogs y opiniones de economia en ingles

Updated on July 7th, 2021 by Bob Ciura Exchange-traded fund and mutual fund providers have consolidated in a big way in recent years. The number of these independent companies has dwindled via mergers, and the ones that are left are generally not thought of as income stocks. U.S. Global Investors, Inc. (GROW) pays a dividend, […]

The post Monthly Dividend Stock In Focus: U.S. Global Investors appeared first on Sure Dividend.

Looking back, today's financial pundits will be embarrassed that they missed the warning signs leading to this inevitable super crash. Unfortunately, they were too busy monetizing useful idiots. This era marks the period when the dumb money rushed off the sidelines 12 years after 2008 in order to buy a pandemic driven asset bubble at the end of the economic cycle. What finally drew them in? The gamification of markets. You can't make this shit up...

Fittingly, Robinhood finally filed for its long-awaited IPO this past week. The company grew its number of accounts 150% over the past year. Robinhood pioneered the zero commission trading model which was adopted by all of the other brokers in late 2019 just before the pandemic started. Since that time, recreational trading has skyrocketed. It's like a new pastime or hobby.





This new gambling fetish gave rise to the Dave Portnification of markets. Inexperienced buffoons who discovered markets late in life and decided they were trading geniuses. Aided and abetted by the largest central bank injections in world history. As they say, timing is everything. In Nassim Taleb's "Fooled by Randomness", he describes a rube trader who finds early success in a bull market and comes to believe he's a trading savant. So he doubles down on every trade until he blows himself up. Basically describing the Portnoy army of traders. 
All of this excessive gambling is highly reminiscent of Y2K, only today's gamblers are 100% confident that central banks won't let them down. Nevertheless, already the Fed is moving towards tapering their asset purchases which is why bond yields are falling every day now.





Sentiment Trader notes that the correlation between growth and value is now at a record low. Which is why the number of stonks holding up this gong show is also reaching record divergences in breadth. Last week I showed that the % of stocks BELOW the 50 dma at an all time high on the S&P 500 was at a multi decade high. Yesterday the same thing happened on the Nasdaq - except this is an all time high divergence: 






What we notice via sentiment is that active managers keep getting rinsed by this robo market. They have one foot out the door but then they get dragged back in which is ironically fueling the market higher.
A similar dynamic took place in 2018 and then the wheels came off the bus. It's only a matter of time. Most money managers won't see it coming. They're the reason this is taking so long.


 



On the retail side we just learned that the Ameritrade Investor Movement Index reached a new all time high in June. This indicator shows investor risk allocations in markets. We can assume via this index that record margin balances expanded again in June:




Fittingly, Amazon.com is making a new all time high this week. No stock epitomizes the insanity of this era better than Amazon. Today's full Idiocracy now has 100% confidence in the virtual economy. Because no one told them there is no such thing.
No surprise, Amazon is one of the top stocks manipulated on social media.

 


In summary, we have now achieved the full Ponzification of society. An army of Bernie Madoffs running amok figuring out their next pump and dump scheme. 
For their part, today's financial pundits realized a long time ago that there was no money to be made from intelligent discourse. The addressable audience is far too small. So they are now all competing to monetize the vast base of useful idiots.
Which is why they don't have time to focus on other matters, such as obvious risk. 

Ten Simple Money Rules for Investing Success
Bad decisions and poor behavior are the primary reasons why many fail to meet their financial goals.
Bloomberg, July 5, 2021

 

 

To hear an audio spoken word version of this post, click here.

 

 

Creating lists1 is a useful way to organize your thoughts: I have created lists of rules for Investing, Valuation, Stock tips, Goldbuggery, even useless financial phrases to avoid. I find these exercises to be valuable ways to figure out what I think.

Thinking about money – saving it, spending it, and most of all, how to invest it – is something I have spent decades doing. This has led to recognizing several fundamental truths about capital.

Naturally, I have organized these rules into a list:

My Top 10 Rules for Money

1. Investing Is Both Simple and Hard: The basic premise behind successful investing is easily understood: “Invest for the long term, be diversified, watch your costs, and let compounding work its magic.”

But following through can be challenging. Humans are plagued by an inability to just “sit there and do nothing.” Failing to do nothing leads to costly errors and loss of capital that erode returns. Understanding what is required is very different than being able to perform, regardless of circumstances, for decades on end.

This leads us to:

2. Behavior Is Everything: The inability to manage emotions and behavior is the financial undoing of many. To paraphrase William Bernstein, “the extent you succeed in finance is based on your ability to suppress your limbic system. If you can’t do that, you’re going to die poor.”

Even the greatest stock pickers will underperform if unable to control their emotional impulses. Allowing those emotional hot buttons to get pressed is how people go wrong in investing. There are no shortcuts, secrets or get rich quick schemes that work, except for my 3-day workshop where I reveal the secrets of the ultra-rich for the low, low price of $4,995. Sign up here.

3. Moderation In All Things: Think of the majority of the assets in your portfolio -– hopefully a diversified, global mix of passive index funds — as the basic meat and potatoes of investing. You can add seasonings, herbs, and vegetables to spice it up and add some flavor.

Want to do some early-stage investing in tech start-ups? Maybe some real estate speculation? Perhaps a few private equity investments in non-public businesses? Maybe even a fun trading account?

I don’t have a problem with any of that as long as it meets two conditions. First, you should understand that the odds of success are against you. Many billions of dollars are aggressively competing in the same space for returns. The professionals are always searching for an edge, and even with one, there are no guarantees of success.

Second, it should be a smallish chunk of your liquid net worth, perhaps about 5% to 10%. That is enough to provide you a little fun and intellectual stimulation. Some might even discover a knack for such investing. But the amounts should be small enough that if the investment doesn’t work out it won’t affect your financial plan.

4. Risk and Reward Are Inseparable: Risk is best defined as the probability of your returns differing from your expected outcomes.2 The problem is that many investors want better-than-market returns while assuming minimal risk. But returns are a function of the risks assumed.

Risk-free U.S. Treasuries yield almost nothing. To do better, own equities. But that adds volatility to your portfolio. If you seek higher returns, you can add low beta stocks that have the potential to do better – or worse – than the market as a whole.

5. Spend Less Than You Earn: Budgeting is simple: Income goes on this side of your household balance sheet, expenditures on that side and make sure the latter is lower than the former. It’s that easy!

I have zero tolerance for the spending scolds who tell you never buy a boat, don’t get a new car (especially a sports car), and avoid buying lattes. This is lazy, ignorant and poor advice given by charlatans and frauds who do not understand math or finance. If they did, they would add the magic phrase: “…if you cannot afford it.”

But if you can, then spend your money however you like but preferably thoughtfully. People often skip purchases they can afford out of misplaced guilt.3

6. Leverage Kills: Using borrowed money for nearly anything is the negative manifestation of the three prior rules. Yes, get a mortgage to buy a house you can afford. But never use borrowed money to buy speculative assets that are subject to further capital calls.4

7. Understand Your Role: The markets are populated by all kinds. There are traders and investors, hedgers and speculators, and everyone has different risk tolerances, time horizons and financial goals. Do not assume what any of America’s 800 billionaires have to say about investing is especially relevant for your needs. Their goals are likely different than yours.

8. Be Aware of Your Limitations: What gets so many investors into trouble “is not what we don’t know, it’s what we know for sure that just ain’t so.”5 Understanding the limitations of your cognitive errors and belief systems is just the start. It’s also important to know what inadequacies you have financially, emotionally and behaviorally. Operating outside of your own capabilities is a good way to run into trouble.6

9. Own It: You are responsible for own financial well-being, not the Federal Reserve, the government or whichever huckster is yelling the loudest on TV at the moment. You alone accept responsibility for your investments and spending. The sooner you take ownership of your financial circumstances, the better off you will be.

10. Invest In Yourself: This is the most important investment you can make. Educate yourself, develop an expertise and add to your professional skill stack.7

And invest in your future by making sure you fully fund your retirement accounts every year. Make those long-term investment needs before spending on short term wants (that’s as much of a scold as I can muster).

After making my list, I asked Twitter folks for their favorites. The result was hundreds of suggestions. Consider them an ala carte menu showing both breadth and depth.

My final admonition is the most important rule: “Behave!” As noted throughout, ill-advised decision-making and poor behavior are the biggest reasons why many fail to meet their financial goals. All of the above either directly or indirectly refers to behavioral issues dressed up in the lexicon of finance.

Go make a list of rules, then follow it. Your future self will thank you.

 

 

Previously:
Your Favorite Money Rules (July 2, 2021)

Ritholtz’s Rules of Investing (part I) (October 6, 2012)

Ritholtz’s rules of investing (part II) (October 20, 2012)

 

_______

1. Lists are a useful way to organize your thoughts: The Top 10 list was the heart of David Letterman’s late night career; the listicle has been a big driver of social media and online content creation. As a heuristic, the list is a useful mental shortcut (although that does come with some baggage).

2. Note this is different than “Uncertainty.”

3. In my office, I have seen vacation homes, sailboats, and the occasional Ferrari purchased only after many assurances that “Yes, you can afford that” (you can afford 100 of them, but let’s start with 1).

4. Archegos Capital Management was running about 5 to 1 leverage, then blew up quite spectacularly, losing $20 billion and wiping out founder Bill Hwang. Lehman Brothers, founded in 1847, regularly ran 20 to 40-to-1. They shuffled off this mortal coil in 2008 during the financial crisis, an act more akin to suicide than murder. The most extreme example was Long Term Capital Management, which ran 100-to-1 leverage. When they blew up they nearly took the banking system with them.

5. For example, that above quote, often ascribed to Mark Twain, is more likely unknown.

6. The lesson taught in high-performance driving schools is the importance of operating within the capabilities of both the vehicle and the driver.

7. Take care of your physical body (eating healthy, exercising, getting enough sleep), and your emotional state (meditating, relaxing).

 

~~~

I originally published this at Bloomberg, July 5, 2021. All of my Bloomberg columns can be found here and here.

 

 

 

The post Top 10 Rules for Money appeared first on The Big Picture.

Ben Carlson took a look at the fact that in the fifteen months since mid-March 2020, the S&P 500 has doubled on a total return basis (includes dividends). Ben found that this has never happened before, this fast, after a crash, outside of the 1930’s. In the early 30’s, stocks had fallen ninety-something percent (!) from their peak, of course the bounce back is going to be every bit as vicious. Last year&#...

The post The stock market just doubled. appeared first on The Reformed Broker.

Today’s Animal Spirits is brought to you by YCharts Mention Animal Spirits to receive 20% off when you initially sign up for the service. On today’s show we discuss: How long do bear markets last? Robinhood’s S1 is really something else Robinhood has 18 million accounts A lesson in meme finance The pandemic forced a lot of people into an early retirement $35 Trillion Giveaway 9 Million Americans didn&#82...

The post Animal Spirits: $35 Trillion Giveaway appeared first on The Irrelevant Investor.

I know we are debating in the United States and the UK when the central bank will stop buying additional government bonds but if we are honest, no one who should be taken seriously currently expects long-term bond yields to go through the roof. We will face several more years of very low bond yields compared to historical averages.

All of this is done to incentivise businesses to borrow money and invest it for future growth. And on average that is what low bond yields do, though to a much smaller degree than central bankers would like. But as the old joke goes, an economist is someone with his head in the oven and his feet in the fridge, saying “on average, this is quite comfortable”. 

The problem with low bond yields is that the impact they have on companies is very different. And once more, we can and should learn from Japan where we have more than two decades of low interest rates to teach us how business leaders take advantage of them.

One key driver of corporate behaviour with respect to long-term bond yields is the interest cover ratio of the company. Most companies (even in Japan) have an interest cover ratio (ICR) above one, that is their operating earnings cover their interest expenses and more. But there is a substantial minority of companies (in Japan it is currently about 15% of all businesses) that are zombie companies in the sense that their operating earnings aren’t sufficient to even cover the interest expense on their outstanding debt.

In an environment of low short-term and long-term interest rates, these two types of companies behave very differently. High-ICR companies with profitable businesses tend to take advantage of low interest rates and invest in future growth. While this may mean taking out loans in the short term, over time, the investment in future growth will create additional profits to pay back the outstanding loans and debt and delever the balance sheet. Meanwhile, low-ICR companies that can’t even cover their interest expense don’t invest. And rightfully so, because if you take out a loan to invest in an already unprofitable business, you are just making your situation worse. Instead, the best thing you can do is to replace short-term debt with long-term debt to lock in the low interest rates for as long as you can. As the two charts below show, this is exactly what happened in Japan. Profitable high-ICR companies invested in their business and reduced their debt over time, while unprofitable low-ICR companies just shifted short-term debt into long-term debt.

The impact of low long-term rates on corporate balance sheets. Short-term debt on the left, long-term debt on the right

a.image2.image-link.image2-553-1456 { padding-bottom: 37.980769230769226%; padding-bottom: min(37.980769230769226%, 553px); width: 100%; height: 0; } a.image2.image-link.image2-553-1456 img { max-width: 1456px; max-height: 553px; }

Source: Igan et al. (2021)

In the long run, this increases the difference between zombie companies and profitable companies in several metrics. Profitable companies invest in future growth and create large amounts of shareholder value while zombie firms just shift debt from short-term to long-term and continue to slowly erode shareholder equity. Thus, paying attention to which company is able to cover its interest payments with its operating profits and which is not, is a key factor to understand if you want to invest in companies that will do well over the next five to ten years.

Change in balance sheet due to low interest rates

a.image2.image-link.image2-832-1192 { padding-bottom: 69.79865771812081%; padding-bottom: min(69.79865771812081%, 832px); width: 100%; height: 0; } a.image2.image-link.image2-832-1192 img { max-width: 1192px; max-height: 832px; }

Source: Igan et al. (2021)

Only ten players in the NBA are on the top 10 list. The Portland Trail Blazers have one of these guys, and his name is Damian Lillard. The NBA is a superstar league. You can’t win a championship without one. So if there is an opportunity to get one of these players, you do whatever you gotta do to get one. The Knicks have emerged as one of the possible destinations. Okay fine. People on the internet are just making ...

The post Forget the Bulls, Watch the Bears appeared first on The Irrelevant Investor.

Can I share this graphic?
Yes. Visualizations are free to share and post in their original form across the web—even for publishers. Please link back to this page and attribute Visual Capitalist.

When do I need a license?
Licenses are required for some commercial uses, translations, or layout modifications. You can even white label our visualizations. Explore your options.

Interested in this piece?
Click here to license this visualization.

▼ Use This Visualizationa.bg-showmore-plg-link:hover,a.bg-showmore-plg-link:active,a.bg-showmore-plg-link:focus{color:#0071bb;}

Breaking Down America’s Energy Consumption in 2020

The United States relies on a complex mix of energy sources to fuel the country’s various end-sectors’ energy consumption.

While this energy mix is still dominated by fossil fuels, there are signs of a steady shift to renewable energy over the past decade.

This radial Sankey diagram using data from the EIA (Energy Information Administration) breaks down U.S. energy consumption in 2020, showing us how much each sector relies on various energy sources.

The Balance of Energy Production and Consumption

In 2019 and now in 2020, America’s domestic energy production has actually been greater than its consumption—a development that hasn’t taken place since 1957.

Last year’s numbers were severely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, seeing a 5% drop in energy production and a 7% drop in consumption compared to 2019. Total energy production and consumption for 2020 came in at 95.75 and 92.94 quads respectively.

The energy amounts are equalized and measured in quadrillion BTUs (British thermal units), also known as quads. A quad is a huge amount of energy, equivalent to 183 million barrels of petroleum or 36 million tonnes of coal.

So how is America’s overall energy production and consumption split between energy sources?

U.S. Energy Production and Consumption Share by Source Energy SourcePercentage of U.S. Energy ProductionPercentage of U.S. Energy Consumption Petroleum32%35% Natural Gas36%34% Renewable Energy12%12% Coal11%10% Nuclear9%9%

Source: IEA

America’s new margin of energy production over consumption has resulted in the country being a net total energy exporter again, providing some flexibility as the country continues its transition towards more sustainable and renewable energy sources.

Fossil Fuels Still Dominate U.S. Energy Consumption

While America’s mix of energy consumption is fairly diverse, 79% of domestic energy consumption still originates from fossil fuels. Petroleum powers over 90% of the transportation sector’s consumption, and natural gas and petroleum make up 74% of the industrial sector’s direct energy consumption.

There are signs of change as consumption of the dirtiest fossil fuel, coal, has declined more than 58% since its peak in 2005. Coinciding with this declining coal dependence, consumption from renewable energy has increased for six years straight, setting record highs again in 2020.

However, fossil fuels still make up 79% of U.S. energy consumption, with renewables and nuclear accounting for the remaining 21%. The table below looks at the share of specific renewable energy sources in 2020.

Distribution of Renewable Energy Sources Renewable Energy Source2020 Energy Consumption in QuadsShare of 2020 Renewable Energy Consumption Biomass4.5239% Wind3.0126% Hydroelectric2.5522% Solar1.2711% Geothermal0.232%

Source: IEA

The Nuclear Necessity for a Zero-Emission Energy Transition

It’s not all up to renewable energy sources to clean up America’s energy mix, as nuclear power will play a vital role in reducing carbon emissions. Technically not a renewable energy source due to uranium’s finite nature, nuclear energy is still a zero-emission energy that has provided around 20% of total annual U.S. electricity since 1990.

Support for nuclear power has been growing slowly, and last year was the first which saw nuclear electricity generation overtake coal. However, this might not last as three nuclear plants including New York’s Indian Point nuclear plant are set to be decommissioned in 2021, with a fourth plant scheduled for retirement in 2022.

It’s worth noting that while other countries might have a higher share of nuclear energy in their total electricity generation, the U.S. still has the largest nuclear generation capacity worldwide and has generated more nuclear electricity than any other country in the world.

Converting Energy to Electricity

The energy produced by nuclear power plants doesn’t go directly to its end-use sector, rather, 100% of nuclear energy in the U.S. is converted to electricity which is sold to consumers. Along with nuclear, most energy sources aside from petroleum are primarily converted to electricity.

Unfortunately, electricity conversion is a fairly inefficient process, with around 65% of the energy lost in the conversion, transmission, and distribution of electricity.

This necessary but wasteful step allows for the storage of energy in electrical form, ensuring that it can be distributed properly. Working towards more efficient methods of energy to electricity conversion is an often forgotten aspect of reducing wasted energy.

Despite the dip in 2020, both energy production and consumption in the U.S. are forecasted to continue rising. As Biden aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030 (from 2005 emission levels), U.S. energy consumption will inevitably continue to shift away from fossil fuels and towards renewable and nuclear energy.

The post Visualizing the Flow of U.S. Energy Consumption appeared first on Visual Capitalist.

5:30pm ET LIVE premiere today – Subscribe for the alert! Join Downtown Josh Brown and Michael Batnick for another round of What Are Your Thoughts? On this week’s episode, Josh and Michael discuss the biggest topics in investing and finance, including: ►Roaring Labor Market – Is this really the sort of “inflation” that destabilizes an economy? ►Corporate Earnings – If you think the labor ma...

The post Corporate Profits and Workers’ Wages on Fire appeared first on The Reformed Broker.

Netflix, Inc.’s (NFLX) stock experienced steady growth over the past year, outperforming the S&P 500 as of July 2, 2021. The stock saw gains of approximately 64.9% compared to the S&P 500’s increase of about 33.7%. Netflix saw a rise in ranking on the WhaleWisdom Heatmap to an impressive level of five from 43, and hedge funds were buying.

Netflix is an entertainment service company that provides subscription services for customers to enjoy movies and television shows through streaming and DVDs by mail. Netflix initially saw subscriber growth soar during the earlier months of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, when the government issued stay-at-home orders left customers seeking additional in-home entertainment. However, while Netflix remains a popular service, the rate of increase in their subscriber base ultimately slowed.

Hedge Funds Were Buying

Investors may be encouraged by first-quarter activity as hedge funds were adding to their portfolios. The aggregate 13F shares held by hedge funds increased to about 72.9 million from 71.6 million, a rise of approximately 1.8%. Of the hedge funds, 31 created new positions, 166 added holdings, 49 exited, and 115 reduced their stakes. Overall, institutions were selling and decreased their aggregate holdings by about 0.8% to approximately 353.6 million from 356.5 million.

(WhaleWisdom)

Encouraging Estimates for 2021 and 2022

Analysts expect to see profits rise over the next two years, with increases in growth from 2021 to 2022 that could bring earnings to $13.05 per share in 2022, up from $10.59 for 2021. Revenue is predicted to reach $34.2 billion by December 2022, up from an estimated $29.7 billion in 2021. Also, a historical look at 13F metrics between 2002 and 2020 demonstrates that Netflix’s stock value continues to gain despite plateaus in total 13F shares held.

(WhaleWisdom)

Favorable Ratings

Several investment firms gave Netflix an Outperform rating while maintaining price targets at favorable levels. Credit Suisse Group upgraded the company’s rating to Outperform from Neutral, expecting that subscriber growth will normalize in the fourth quarter. Credit Suisse kept a $586 price target on the stock noting its strong position among competitors. Cowen & Co. maintained an Outperform rating with a $650 price target.

Positive Outlook

Overall, there is a positive outlook for Netflix’s streaming future. Netflix and its competitors have all been beneficiaries of pandemic lockdowns. However, beyond the lockdowns, Netflix has a great business model with a continued strong interest in content from its customer base, leaving its long-term growth and future revenue estimates appealing to investors.

Market is responding to pullback in yields: Investor from CNBC. ...

The post Clips From Today’s Halftime Report appeared first on The Reformed Broker.

The following content is sponsored by Abaxx

A New Era of Commodity Trading

In today’s world of aggressive climate goals, awareness for the need to source commodities in a sustainable way has increased.

This infographic from Abaxx takes an introductory look at what commodity markets are, what drives revenue for commodity exchanges, and the need for a new set of contracts to deliver a more sustainable future.

The Evolution of Commodity Exchanges

From the simple gatherings of farmers to trade livestock to global contracts that trade the energy supplies of entire nations, commodity markets have evolved to deal with the changing demands of markets.

In the mid-19th century, commodity exchanges offered specialized contracts that resulted in less volume per exchange. The advent of the internet and digital platforms in the early 2000s increased the global reach of trading, increasing trading volumes.

While energy contracts dominate commodity exchanges, there are also metals and agricultural contracts that deliver the goods the world consumes. However, global economies take for granted the complex process that prices commodities, helping codify the terms of trade to facilitate a seemingly endless bounty of resources.

How Do Commodity Exchanges Work?

Exchanges facilitate discovery of the right price for commodities by providing a meeting place where buyers and sellers form a marketplace to trade and negotiate a price.

The price discovery process involves several market participants:

• The producers who supply the commodities
• The brokers who communicate with transport, shipping, and insurance to trade on behalf of clients
• The industrial end-users who are individuals or manufacturers that require or consume a commodity

The activities of these market participants generate a consensus on price and establishes a benchmark for a particular commodity. It is the future contracts that codify the terms of trades and prices, creating trust and minimizing risk between producers and end-users.

What is a Futures Contract?

Exchanges provide the market with contracts to facilitate trades and market data. It is these contracts that form the basis for the revenue of commodity exchanges.

In 2020, the four major commodity trading groups, ICE, CME, HKEX and SGX, generated $14 billion in revenue. While there are many types of contracts that cover the variety of commodities from metals to crops, typically only a handful of contracts account for the bulk of trading and revenue.

According to data compiled from the Futures Industry Association (FIA), in energy, metals and precious markets markets, the top 10 contracts account for 79.8%, 90.9% and 96% of the markets, respectively.

Markedly, this pattern makes contracts very valuable and a key driver of revenue for commodity exchanges. However, the commodity exchanges have yet to deliver specific contracts that can meet the demands for the specific materials and issues in the green energy transition.

Futures Contracts for the New Energy Era

The materials used to fuel economies are rapidly changing in order to create a more sustainable world. However, cleaner fuels such as LNG (liquified natural gas) do not have the history of established contracts and trust despite the rising demand.

Emerging markets in South Asia and India present the greatest opportunity for LNG adoption to provide clean burning fuel for a growing population.

The Abaxx Exchange is developing a LNG futures contract that will set the standard for this new market with new technology to better manage risks, execute trades, while embedding ESG concerns into global supply chains.

LNG is just the beginning—the world will need codified contracts to deliver the materials of the green energy revolution and Abaxx is leading the way.

The post The New Era of Commodity Trading appeared first on Visual Capitalist.

What would we do with abundant energy? I dream of virtually unlimited, clean, dirt-cheap energy, but lately, we have been going in the wrong direction. As J. Storrs Hall notes, in 1978 and 1979, American per capita primary energy consumption peaked at 12 kW. In 2019, we used 10.2 kW of primary energy (and in 2020, we used 9.4 kW, a figure skewed by the pandemic economy). We are doing more with less, squeezing out more value per joule than ever before. But why settle for energy efficiency alone? With many more joules, we could create much more value and live richer lives.

A benefit of climate change is that lots of smart people are rethinking energy, but I fear they aren’t going far enough. If we want not just to replace current energy consumption with low-carbon sources, but also to, say, increase global energy output by an order of magnitude, we need to look beyond wind and solar. Nuclear fission would be an excellent option if it were not so mired in regulatory obstacles. Fusion could do it, but it still needs a lot of work. Next-generation geothermal could have the right mix of policy support, technology readiness, and resource size to make a big contribution to abundant clean energy in the near future.

Let’s talk about resource size first. Stanford’s Global Climate and Energy Project estimates crustal thermal energy reserves at 15 million zetajoules. Coal + oil + gas + methane hydrates amount to 630 zetajoules. That means there is 23,800 times as much geothermal energy in Earth’s crust as there is chemical energy in fossil fuels everywhere on the planet. Combining the planet’s reserves of uranium, seawater uranium, lithium, thorium, and fossil fuels yields 365,030 zetajoules. There is 41 times as much crustal thermal energy than energy in all those sources combined. (Total heat content of the planet, including the mantle and the core, is about three orders of magnitude higher still.)

Although today’s geothermal energy is only harvested from spots where geothermal steam has made itself available at the surface, with some creative subsurface engineering it could be produced everywhere on the planet. Like nuclear energy, geothermal runs 24/7, so it helps solve the intermittency problem posed by wind and solar. Unlike nuclear energy, it is not highly regulated, which means it could be cheap in practice as well as in theory.

At a high level, the four main next-generation geothermal concepts I will discuss do the same thing. They (1) locate and access heat, (2) transfer subsurface heat to a working fluid and bring it to the surface, and (3) exploit the heat energy at the surface through direct use or conversion to electricity. It is the second step, transferring subsurface heat to a working fluid, that is non-obvious.

What is the right working fluid? What is the best way to physically transfer the heat? Given drilling costs, what is the right target rock temperature for heat transfer? These questions are still unresolved. Different answers will give you a different technical approach. Let’s talk about the four different concepts people are working on right now, including their strengths and weaknesses, before turning to the bottlenecks in the industry.

Concept #1: Enhanced geothermal systems

Like today’s conventional geothermal (“hydrothermal”) systems, enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) feature one or more injection wells where water goes into the ground, and one or more production wells where steam comes out of the ground. Hydrothermal systems today not only need heat resources close to the surface, they require the right kind of geology in the near subsurface. The rock between the injection and production wells needs to be permeable so that the water can flow through it and acquire heat energy. The rock above that layer needs to be impermeable, so that steam doesn’t escape to the surface except through the production wells.

EGS starts with the premise of using drilling technology to access deeper heat resources. This makes it viable in more places than hydrothermal, which relies on visual evidence of heat at the surface for project siting. If you see a volcano or a geyser or a fumarole, that might be a good location for a conventional hydrothermal project. But there are only a limited number of such sites, and if we want to expand the geographic availability of geothermal we have to use deeper wells to access heat sources that are further below ground.

Once we have our deeper wells, we need a way for water to flow between them. Fortunately, since 2005, petroleum engineers have gotten good at making underground fracture networks. By using modified versions of the fracking perfected in the shale fields, geothermal engineers can create paths of tiny cracks through which water can flow between the two wells. This fracture network has a lot of surface area, which means it is relatively good for imparting heat energy to the water.

EGS has some advantages over the other next-generation geothermal concepts. From a technical perspective, it is not a big leap from existing hydrothermal practice, so the technology risk is low. In addition, the high surface area of the hot underground fracture network is good for creating steam.

Yet today’s EGS also has a disadvantage relative to the other approaches. Because the system has an open reservoir exposed to the subsurface, most EGS projects plan to use water as a working fluid. Water does not become supercritical until it reaches 374ºC (and 22 MPa). Using today’s drilling technology, EGS projects usually will not reach these temperatures, because it costs too much to drill to the required depths. Fluids in their supercritical states have higher enthalpy than in their subcritical states, so depth limitations mean EGS can’t bring as much heat energy to the surface as it could if it had access to a supercritical fluid.

Even so, EGS is promising. This year, Fervo raised a $28M Series B to pursue this approach. It also signed a deal with Google to power some of its data centers, part of the search giant’s plan to move to 100% zero-carbon energy by 2030.

Concept #2: Closed-loop geothermal systems

Imagine that, like EGS, you had an injection and a production well, but instead of relying on a network of fractures in the open subsurface to connect them, you simply connected the two wells with a pipe. The working fluid would flow down the injection well, horizontally through a lateral segment of pipe, and then up through the production well. Because such a system is closed to the subsurface, it is called a closed-loop system.

Relative to EGS, closed-loop systems have both advantages and disadvantages. A key advantage is that the working fluid can easily be something other than water. Isobutane has a critical temperature of 134.6ºC, and CO2’s is only 31.0ºC. Even with today’s drilling technology, we can reach these temperatures almost everywhere on the planet. Closed-loop systems offer the higher enthalpy associated with supercritical fluids at depths we can reach today. In addition, closed-loop systems work no matter the underlying geology, removing a risk that EGS projects face.

The big disadvantage of closed-loop systems is that pipes have much lower surface areas than fracture networks. Since heat is imparted to the working fluid by surface contact, this limits the rate at which the system can acquire energy. A solution to this is to use not just one horizontal segment, but many, like the radiator-style designs shown below. These segments can be numerous and long enough to ensure adequate heat transfer.

The problem remains, however, that these radiator-style segments are expensive to drill with today’s technology. It is possible that with experience and better drilling techniques the cost could be reduced to make this approach viable. Closed-loop startup Eavor is pursuing this approach, starting with a project in Germany taking advantage of that country’s generous geothermal subsidies.

Concept #3: Heat roots

What if you could combine the advantages of closed loops—like the ability to use a supercritical working fluid—with a way to capture the heat from a much larger surface area than that of a simple pipe? That’s the goal of Sage Geosystems’s Heat Roots concept.

Sage starts with a single vertical shaft. From the base of the shaft, they frack downwards to create a fracture pattern that gives the impression of a root system for a tree. They fill this “root” system with a convective and conductive fluid. Then, using a pipe-in-pipe system, they circulate a separate working fluid from the surface to the base of the shaft and back. At the base of the shaft, a heat exchanger takes the energy concentrated by the heat root system and imparts it to the working fluid.

This “heat roots” approach enables a lot of the benefits of closed-loop systems, like the ability to use supercritical fluids, without the main drawback of needing long horizontal pipe segments. The roots draw in and concentrate heat from greater depths than the primary shaft. In other words, closed-loop’s problem of limited surface area is solved by doing additional subsurface engineering outside of the closed loop.

A disadvantage of a monobore, pipe-in-pipe design is the limited flow rate of working fluid. In the oil and gas industry, the widest standard well diameter is 9⅝ inches. It would be non-trivial to go wider than that—you would need special drilling equipment and new casing systems. The power output of the entire system is directly proportional to the flow rate, so the monobore heat roots design is constrained in this way.

This may or may not be a problem. If the cost of constructing each individual well is low enough, then the solution would be to stamp out hundreds of thousands of these wells. What matters is the cost per watt and that the design is reproducible. It may be possible to make these or similar wells work almost anywhere by simply drilling deeply enough, although that is not yet proven.

Sage raised a Series A earlier this year and is currently working on a demonstration well in Texas. “Once we get through a successful pilot these next few months,” says Sage CTO Lance Cook, “we are off to the races.” In addition to its heat roots design, it is also studying a few other configurations.

Concept #4: Supercritical EGS

What if we had much better drilling technology? Put aside the fancy stuff, like horizontal segments—what if we could simply drill straight down into the earth much deeper and faster and cheaper than we can today?

This one capability would unlock a huge increase in geothermal power density. With depth comes higher temperatures. If we could cheaply and reliably access temperatures around 500ºC, we could make water go supercritical. This would unleash a step-change in enthalpy, without the closed loops otherwise needed for supercritical fluids. By doing EGS (concept #1) in these hotter conditions, we could get the biggest benefit of EGS—a high surface area to use to transfer heat—with one of the biggest benefits of closed-loop systems—the use of a supercritical working fluid. In addition to higher enthalpy, supercritical steam will produce higher electrical output in virtue of a higher delta-T in the generator cycle. Output of the cycle is directly proportional to the temperature differential between the steam and ambient conditions.

The benefits of producing supercritical steam at the surface go beyond these physics-based arguments. A huge potential advantage would be the ability to retrofit existing coal plants. With many coal plants shutting down in the next several years, a lot of valuable generator equipment could be lying around idle. These generators take supercritical steam as an input and use it to produce electricity. The generators don’t care whether the steam comes from a boiler fired with coal or from 15 km underground. Piping steam from a geothermal production well straight into a coal plant turbine would allow the power plant to produce the same amount of electricity as it did under coal, except with no fuel costs and no carbon emissions.

Even if free generating equipment isn’t just lying around, supercritical geothermal steam could significantly increase the output and decrease the cost of geothermal electricity. The question is whether we can achieve the necessary cost reductions in ultra-deep drilling. Rotary drill bits struggle against hard basement rock. They break and then have to be retrieved to the surface, where they are repaired and sent back downhole. This process is time-consuming and expensive. Non-rotary drilling technologies like water hammers, lasers, plasma cutters, and mm-wave directed energy have all been proposed as ways to let us drill deeper faster. By optimizing for hot, dense, hard basement rock, we could drill much deeper than we can today.

The big downside of supercritical EGS is that these advanced drilling technologies haven’t been proven yet. The big advantage is what it could enable: high-density geothermal energy anywhere on the planet. Literally every location on the planet can produce supercritical steam if you drill deep enough into the basement rock—you may have to drill 20 km to reach 500ºC temperatures in some spots, but it’s there.

Quaise is an example of a company pursuing this supercritical EGS approach. The gyrotrons used in fusion experiments produce enough energy to vaporize granite. Quaise is commercializing mm-wave directed energy technology out of MIT’s Plasma Science and Fusion Center.

Policy is suboptimal but not a deal-breaker

Unlike nuclear fission, which is regulated to near-oblivion, geothermal faces relatively few policy obstacles. I will highlight two areas where policy could easily be improved, but even if these problems are not fixed, they will likely only slow, not stop, maturation of the next-generation geothermal industry.

The first issue involves permitting. While our goal for this technology should be to enable geothermal anywhere on the planet, the natural starting point for working down the learning curve is in areas where high temperatures are closest to the surface. If you look at a map of temperature at depth in the United States, you will notice that the best spots for geothermal drilling overlap considerably with land owned by Uncle Sam.

Drilling on federal lands involves federal permitting—which involves environmental review. Environmental review, mandated by the National Environmental Policy Act any time a federal agency takes a major action that could affect the environment, can take years.

Conveniently, the oil and gas industry got themselves an exclusion from these requirements. The effects of drilling an oil and gas well on federal lands are rebuttably presumed to be insignificant, as long as certain limitations apply—for example, the surface disturbance of the well is less than 5 acres. Oil and gas wells are very similar to geothermal wells, so it makes sense that they would have very similar environmental impacts. As I have written for CGO, simply extending oil and gas’s categorical exclusion to geothermal energy is an absolute no-brainer.

This permitting issue shows that the nearly non-existent geothermal lobby is (surprise!) less effective than the oil and gas lobby. It may also be less effective than the wind and solar lobbies. Geothermal execs have complained that tax subsidies for geothermal are lower than for wind and solar. I am no tax expert, but if I am reading Section 48 of the tax code correctly, there is a 30% tax credit for utility-scale solar and only a 10% credit for a geothermal plant—that’s a big disparity. (There is also a 30% tax credit for investing in a facility to produce geothermal equipment and a 10-year 1.5¢-per-kWh subsidy for geothermal plants that break ground in 2021. [Update: It’s actually a 2.5¢/kWh subsidy because there is mandatory inflation adjustment and the basis is 1992. Hat tip: SW]).

Neither permitting barriers nor inadequate subsidization are likely to hold back geothermal forever. There are ways, however inconvenient, around the permitting obstacles, like operating on private lands. An unfavorable subsidy environment relative to solar might mean a slower start as financiers dip their toes into geothermal waters more gradually, or it might mean that projects move to Germany, where geothermal feed-in tariffs are quite generous. Even if they aren’t dealbreakers, we ought to fix these policy mistakes so that we can reap the benefits of abundant geothermal energy sooner rather than later.

Technologies that could accelerate deployment

Although some of the geothermal concepts I discussed above will work using today’s technology, there remains R&D to be done to unlock the others, and there are advances to be made that would help all players.

The first area where technical development is needed is in resource characterization—the ability to predict where the heat is in the subsurface and what geology surrounds it. Better predictions reduce project risk and reduce up-front exploration costs. Imagine you are drilling a geothermal well and it is not as hot as you expected it to be. Do you keep drilling and go deeper? Do you give up and drill somewhere else? Either way, it’s expensive. With more accurate predictions, we can keep these cost surprises under better control.

Machine learning is one possible way to crack resource characterization. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory has laid some good groundwork on machine learning and geothermal resources, and a startup called Zanskar is using what appears to be a similar approach. In addition to ML, bigger and more granular data sets as well as new sensor packages that could shed more light on subsurface conditions would be helpful.

Next: we need to harden rotary drill bits and other downhole equipment for geothermal conditions. Geothermal drilling involves higher temperature, pressure, vibration, and shock than oil and gas drilling. Since oil and gas represents the lion’s share of the drilling business, today’s bits aren’t optimized for geothermal conditions. A modern bottom hole assembly includes a drill bit and also equipment for electricity generation, energy storage, communication and telemetry, and monitoring and sensing. It’s a lot of electronics.

Fortunately, NASA and others in the space industry are already working on suitable high-temperature electronics. To land a rover on a planet like Venus or Mercury, or to send a probe into the atmosphere of a gas giant like Jupiter, we need motors, sensors, processors, and memory that will not fail soon after they encounter high heat and pressure. Venus’s average surface condition is 475ºC and 90 Earth atmospheres—if it works on Venus, it will work in all but the most demanding geothermal applications.

Third: we need to mature non-rotary drilling technologies. While polycrystalline diamond compact drill bits are now enabling next-generation geothermal applications for the first time, non-rotary concepts could allow us to cost-effectively go deeper through even harder rock. Non-rotary drilling concepts include water hammers, plasma bits, lasers, mm-wave, and even a highly speculative tungsten quasi-“rods from God” idea from Danny Hillis.

Fourth: technologies to support the use of supercritical fluids. Turbines need to be specially designed for supercritical fluids. While turbines already exist for supercritical water, new designs are necessary for lower-temperature fluids like supercritical CO2. In addition, supercritical fluids tend to be more corrosive than their subcritical counterparts, as well as under higher pressure, and so new coatings and casings may be needed to contain them in the subsurface.

There are other possible improvements, but if we can solve several of the above issues, my expectation is that we would generate a robust and self-sustaining industry that can self-fund the further development needed to make next-generation geothermal energy an absolute game-changer.

What’s next?

In an industry ruled by learning curves, what matters most is gaining experience in the field. We need all the companies working on innovative geothermal concepts to drill their demo wells and learn from them, so that they can move on to full-size wells and learn from those, so that they can operate at scale and learn from doing that, so that they can drive down costs (eventually) to almost nothing.

The rest of us should help them.

I have argued that the policy barriers, especially relative to fission, are not dealbreakers. But I continue to work to find policy solutions, because even non-dealbreaker problems can slow down progress. Policymakers who read this and want to learn more are welcome to reach out to me.

Adam Marblestone and Sam Rodriques have proposed Focused Research Organizations to tackle technological development problems not suited for either a startup, an academic team, or a national lab. Often, these problems arise when there is a high degree of coordinated system-building required and when the solutions are not immediately or directly monetizable. Some of the technology problems I described above, like producing a comprehensive dataset of subsurface conditions, developing temperature-hardened drilling equipment, or building systems to support supercritical fluids, may fit that bill. A geothermal-focused FRO supported by $50–100 million over the next 10 years could significantly accelerate progress.

If you want to learn more about progress in geothermal, I highly recommend registering for the upcoming PIVOT2021 conference, being held virtually July 19–23. It’s a comprehensive overview of the entire industry, and totally free. Yours truly is moderating the panel on regulatory and permitting challenges.

If we play our cards right, human civilization could soon have access to a virtually inexhaustible supply of cheap and clean energy. Shouldn’t we pull out all the stops to get there?

The Gamestop bubble at the beginning of this year has created an enormous amount of research by academics in recent months, much more than any other bubble in recent memory. By now we know that retail investors did not “win” against the big hedge funds. Just like I anticipated in January, there is no evidence that retail investors on average made money during the Gamestop episode or that the investment decisions of retail investors can be used to make money in stock markets.

The folks who participated in the Gamestop frenzy were essentially uneducated investors playing the lottery, were mad at Wall Street and overconfident in their ability to beat hedge funds at their own game.

In general, being stupid and overconfident is the best way to lose money. Heck, somebody once told me that the number one cause of death for young men between the age of 16 and 30 is stupidity. And yes, it’s mostly men, because young men think they have figured out the world and have way too much testosterone in their blood to think before they act – especially if they think they can express an attractive girl with their actions. Whether it is falling off a building while taking a selfie on the ledge of a skyscraper, fainting while holding your breath driving in a tunnel and then causing a car crash, or tying yourself to a shopping cart and then pushing the cart into a deep lake, young men are idiots. And if you are the parent of a teenage boy, you know I am right.

But going back to investing, stupidity paired with overconfidence can cause a lot of harm there as well. An analysis of retail investors tried to figure out who buys stocks on margin and who is likely to get a margin call. Turns out that two factors play the key role in determining which investors buy stocks on margin: financial literacy and overconfidence. The charts below show that investors with lower financial literacy are more likely to buy stocks on margin, presumably because they don’t fully understand the risks of buying stocks on margin. In the most extreme cases this can end tragically, as we have seen this year. The second driver is overconfidence. The more confident investors are in their ability to pick stocks, the more likely they are to use margin to boost their investments. Combine a lack of financial literacy with an abundance of overconfidence and you have: a young man making his first trades in the stock market and getting hammered. The best case outcome is that these losses from their investments are “school fees” to be paid as these young investors learn about how markets really work and that there simply is no easy way to get rich quick.

Financial literacy and overconfidence the key drivers of the use of margin

a.image2.image-link.image2-462-1456 { padding-bottom: 31.73076923076923%; padding-bottom: min(31.73076923076923%, 462px); width: 100%; height: 0; } a.image2.image-link.image2-462-1456 img { max-width: 1456px; max-height: 462px; }

Source: Kim et al. (2011)

The Kroger Co. (KR) operates as a retailer in the United States. The company operates supermarkets, multi-department stores, marketplace stores, and price impact warehouse stores.  Kroger is a dividend achiever, which recently hiked quarterly dividends by 16.70% to 21 cents/share. This marked the 15th consecutive year of annual dividend increases for the company. Warren Buffett has also been...

To read the whole article, please click on the article title above.

Barry Ritholtz asked people for their top 10 money rules last week.

Here are mine.

What money can and can’t do for you isn’t intuitive, so most people are surprised at how they feel when they suddenly have more or less than before.

Money makes it easy to mistake optimism (good) with gullibility (dangerous) and overconfidence (disastrous).

Getting rich and staying rich are different things that require different skills.

The formula for how to do well with money is simple. The behaviors you battle while implementing that formula are hard.

“Save more money and be more patient” is too simple for most people to take seriously, but it’s the best solution to most financial problems.

Expectations move slower than reality on the ground, so it’s easy to become frustrated when clinging to the economic trends of a previous era.

Everything is relative. John D. Rockefeller was asked how much money was enough and said, “Just a little bit more.” Everyone, at every income, tends to feel the same.

Spending money to show people how much money you have is the fastest way to have less money.

Debt removes options, savings add them.

No one is impressed with your possessions as much as you are.

Can I share this graphic?
Yes. Visualizations are free to share and post in their original form across the web—even for publishers. Please link back to this page and attribute Visual Capitalist. When do I need a license?
Licenses are required for some commercial uses, translations, or layout modifications. You can even whitelabel our visualizations. Explore your options. Interested in this piece?
Click here to license this visualization.

▼ Use This Visualizationa.bg-showmore-plg-link:hover,a.bg-showmore-plg-link:active,a.bg-showmore-plg-link:focus{color:#0071bb;}

The Briefing

• Electricity from new solar photovoltaic (PV) plants and onshore wind farms is now cheaper than electricity from new coal-fired power plants
• The cost of electricity from solar PV plants has decreased by 90% since 2009

The Transition to Renewable Energy Sources

Renewable energy sources are at the center of the transition to a sustainable energy future and the fight against climate change.

Historically, renewables were expensive and lacked competitive pricing power relative to fossil fuels. However, this has changed notably over the last decade.

Renewables are the Cheapest Sources of New Electricity

Fossil fuel sources still account for the majority of global energy consumption, but renewables are not far off. The share of global electricity from renewables grew from 18% in 2009 to nearly 28% in 2020.

Renewable energy sources follow learning curves or Wright’s Law—they become cheaper by a constant percentage for every doubling of installed capacity. Therefore, the increasing adoption of clean energy has driven down the cost of electricity from new renewable power plants.

Energy SourceType2009 Cost ($/MWh)2020 Cost ($/MWh)% Change in Cost Solar PhotovoltaicRenewable$359$37-90% Onshore WindRenewable$135$40-70% Gas - Peaker PlantsNon-renewable$275$175-36% Gas - Combined Cycle PlantsNon-renewable$83$59-29% Solar thermal towerRenewable$168$141-16% CoalNon-renewable$111$112+1% GeothermalRenewable$76$80+5% NuclearNon-renewable$123$163+33%

Solar PV and onshore wind power plants have seen the most notable cost decreases over the last decade. Furthermore, the price of electricity from gas-powered plants has declined mainly as a result of falling gas prices since their peak in 2008.

By contrast, the price of electricity from coal has stayed roughly the same with a 1% increase. Moreover, nuclear-powered electricity has become 33% more expensive due to increased regulations and the lack of new reactors.

When will Renewable Energy Sources Take Over?

Given the rate at which the cost of renewable energy is falling, it’s only a matter of time before renewables become the primary source of our electricity.

Several countries have committed to achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, and as a result, renewable energy is projected to account for more than half of the world’s electricity generation by 2050.

Where does this data come from?

Source: Lazard Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis Version 14.0, Our World in Data
Details: Figures represent the mean levelized cost of energy per megawatt-hour. Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy report did not include data for hydropower. Therefore, hydropower is excluded from this article.

The post Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources is Now Cheaper than Ever appeared first on Visual Capitalist.

Can I share this graphic?
Yes. Visualizations are free to share and post in their original form across the web—even for publishers. Please link back to this page and attribute Visual Capitalist.

When do I need a license?
Licenses are required for some commercial uses, translations, or layout modifications. You can even white label our visualizations. Explore your options.

Interested in this piece?
Click here to license this visualization.

▼ Use This Visualizationa.bg-showmore-plg-link:hover,a.bg-showmore-plg-link:active,a.bg-showmore-plg-link:focus{color:#0071bb;}

Ranked: The Richest Veterans in America

The U.S is home to 724 billionaires, many of whom have taken on immense risks in the financial world. 16 of these wealthy individuals have also taken on the risks that come with serving in the U.S. military.

These veteran billionaires are worth a collective $81.4 billion and have served in posts ranging from Reserve Officers’ Training Corps (ROTC) to infantrymen in the Second World War. This visual, using data from Forbes, ranks the richest living American veterans.

This visual categorizes the individuals by either the military branch or war served in depending on what was applicable or determinable.

I Want You for the U.S. Army

According to the Department of Veteran’s Affairs, there are around 18 million veterans in the U.S. Of these 18 million, less than 0.01% can claim the title of billionaire.

NameNet Worth (Billions, USD)Industry War / Unit Served Donald Bren$15.3Real Estate Marine Corps Edward Johnson III$10.3Finance & InvestmentsArmy Ralph Lauren$7.1Fashion & RetailArmy Richard Kinder$7.0EnergyVietnam War Charles Dolan & family$6.1Media & EntertainmentWWII, Airforce  Fred Smith$5.7Logistics Vietnam War, Marine Corps Charles B. Johnson$4.9Finance & Investments Army Ted Lerner & family$4.8Real Estate WWII Julian Robertson Jr.$4.5Finance & Investments Navy John Paul DeJoria$2.7Fashion & Retail Navy H. Ross Perot Jr.$2.7Real Estate Airforce Bob Parsons$2.2Technology Vietnam War, Marine Corps David H. Murdock$2.1Food & BeverageWWII S. Daniel Abraham$2.0Food & BeverageWWII, Army Charlie Munger$2.0Finance & InvestmentsWWII, Army Air Corps George Joseph$2.0Finance & InvestmentsWWII

Six of the above veteran billionaires served in WWII. They are some of the last surviving veterans of the historic war which was fought by 16 million Americans—today, only around 325,000 WWII veterans are still alive.

George Joseph, of Mercury Insurance Group, piloted a B17 Bomber plane in WWII, and completed around 50 missions. Warren Buffett’s business partner at Berkshire Hathaway, Charlie Munger, served in the Army Air Corps in the early 1940s.

Richard Kinder (Kinder Morgan Inc.), Fred Smith (FedEx), and H. Ross Perot Jr. (Hillwood Investment Properties) each served in the Vietnam war.

One notable figure, Ralph Lauren, whose name is synonymous with his clothing products, served in the Army branch for two years in the early 1960s.

Taking on Financial Risk

Billionaire wealth continues to grow in America. Most of these veteran billionaires saw their net worths increase from 2020 to 2021, as, typically, wealth begets wealth. Here’s a look at the changes in net worth of the top five richest veterans who experienced increases:

• Edward Johnson III: +$4.9 Billion
• Ralph Lauren: +$1.4 Billion
• Richard Kinder: +$1.8 Billion
• Charles Dolan & Family: +$1.5 Billion
• Fred Smith: +$3.0 Billion

The majority of these veteran billionaires are in the finance industry and some are tied to well-known companies, but they didn’t always have billions on hand to help them exponentially grow their fortunes.

David Murdock was a high school dropout, and after serving in WWII, had no money to his name. He took over a failing company called Dole, and eventually gained the moniker of ‘pineapple king’ after reviving the business.

S. Daniel Abraham, who was an infantryman in WWII, went on to found Thompson Medical. Their main product was Slimfast, which he later sold to Unilever for $2.3 billion in cash in the early 2000s.

Bob Parsons, who received a Purple Heart for his service in Vietnam, started out his professional career as a CPA. He later founded the enormous domain giant, Go Daddy. He has claimed that his time in the military helped him succeed in business.

Peace and Prosperity

We currently live in one of the most peaceful and prosperous times in history, with wars like WWII feeling to many like a story from the past — but for others these conflicts were defining moments for their generation.

While many veterans struggle to readjust to civilian life, on average pre-9/11 veterans have reported fewer difficulties compared to post-9/11 veterans, and some have even managed to reach the highest levels of financial success.

The post Ranked: The Richest Veterans in America appeared first on Visual Capitalist.

Episode #326: Startup Series – Viktor Nebehaj, Freetrade, “We Want Everybody To Have Access To Investing”               Guest: Viktor Nebehaj is Freetrade’s CMO and Co-founder. He can be found penning the weekly Freetrade emails, as well as major company and product updates. Date Recorded: 6/9/2021     |     Run-Time: 52:05 Summary: […]

The post Episode #326: Startup Series – Viktor Nebehaj, Freetrade, “We Want Everybody To Have Access To Investing” appeared first on Meb Faber Research - Stock Market and Investing Blog.