Elias Young 7/2/26 Elias Young 7/2/26

Market Commentary: Midyear 2026

Four Themes Shaping the First Half of 2026

In the first half of 2026, there was plenty of news, but a few different themes in particular stand out to me: a war in the Middle East that unsettled energy markets for months, a new Federal Reserve chair who took a more cautious stance than expected (given the current administration’s pressure), and growing scrutiny of the artificial intelligence (AI) theme that has driven so much of the market's recent gains, both in how AI is being used inside companies and how AI-related revenue is being generated among the largest technology firms.

Through it all, the Standard & Poor's 500 (S&P 500) finished the first half up 10.21% on a price basis[1], a number that hides how uneven the path to get there actually was. This commentary walks through these threads that influenced the first six months of the year and may continue to shape the second.

Federal Reserve and Interest Rates

Jerome Powell's term as Fed chair ended on May 15. Kevin Warsh, confirmed by the Senate in a 54-45 vote, was sworn in on May 22.[2] He was widely viewed as the more rate-cut-friendly, reform-minded choice, having criticized the Fed's communication habits, argued for a smaller balance sheet, and suggested AI would help bring inflation down over time[3]. Though it's notable that Powell remains on the board as a voting member, a dynamic that adds another layer of uncertainty to how policy debates may unfold in the second half.

On June 17, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) held rates steady at 3.50% to 3.75% for a fourth consecutive meeting. Warsh shortened the post-meeting statement, removed language signaling the Fed's future intentions, and declined to submit his own interest rate forecast, consistent with his stated skepticism of the exercise.[4] The other eighteen participants, however, leaned more strongly toward keeping rates higher than expected, with several now projecting at least one rate hike by year-end, a reversal from the rate cut the median projection had implied as recently as March.[5] The reasoning: inflation has proven stickier than hoped, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) running 3.8% year over year in April, the highest since 2023, and the core Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index, the Fed's preferred inflation gauge, moving from 3.0% to 3.3% over the same stretch.[6] (This is still nowhere near the 9.1% peak CPI hit in June 2022, the highest reading in roughly 40 years, which triggered the Fed to raise rates from near zero to over 5% in just about a year and a half.[22]) Energy prices tied to the Iran war are a sizable part of that story, layered on top of a labor market still adding jobs at a pace that gives the Fed little urgency to ease.

A practical note for rate watchers: for those who have been waiting on a rate drop to refinance and lower your monthly payment, that wait could run longer than expected. A mortgage recast is an option for anyone sitting on a lump sum in the interim, since it doesn't depend on rates moving at all. It keeps your existing rate and loan term but applies a sizable principal payment to the balance, then recalculates the monthly payment based on what's left owed, all without the appraisal, credit check, or closing costs of a full refinance. It's typically only available on conventional loans and usually carries a modest processing fee.

Middle East Conflict and Market Impact

On February 28, the United States and Israel launched a joint operation against Iran that killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and opened a regional war that also reignited the Israel-Hezbollah conflict in Lebanon.[7] Iran responded in part by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway carrying roughly 20% of the world's seaborne oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG). Shipping traffic fell more than 90% in the weeks that followed.[8]

Energy markets bore the brunt of it. Brent crude jumped from about $71 to $77 a barrel within days of the first strikes, eventually breaking $100, while West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude peaked near $113 in April. By mid-June, prices had retreated toward the high $70s as ceasefire talks progressed, though Hormuz traffic still has not returned to pre-war levels, and full normalization isn't expected until 2027 even under an optimistic scenario.[9]

Equity markets moved in step with the headlines, selling off through much of March as the conflict widened, then surging when a ceasefire was first announced on April 8, with the Dow gaining over 1,300 points and the S&P 500 up 2.5% that day alone.[10] The United States and Iran signed an agreement on June 17 that paused large-scale hostilities, but it has been tested repeatedly since: a drone strike on a cargo ship on June 25, a U.S. response the next day, Iranian missiles and drones aimed at U.S. bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, and a second ship hit and a second night of U.S. strikes on June 27.[11]

This is the second time in just over a year that an Iran-related conflict has rattled markets, which makes it a useful moment to revisit how markets have historically absorbed military shocks. The two charts illustrate the longer-term picture.

In addition to the charts shown from JP Morgan and Dimensional Fund Advisors, research from LPL and Hartford Funds, looking across dozens of post-World War II shocks, finds an average decline of roughly 5% following a geopolitical event, with markets typically bottoming within about three weeks and recovering within one to two months, and the S&P 500 historically higher a year out about 70% of the time. J.P. Morgan's research group found a similar pattern across seventeen modern conflicts dating back to the Korean War: the S&P 500 sat modestly below its pre-conflict level a year out, then stood roughly 14% above the conflict-month level two years later.[12] The 2026 episode has tracked that pattern reasonably well so far, even though the International Energy Agency has described the disruption to oil markets as the largest in the industry's history.[13]

*S&P 500 around military conflicts (month of event = 100)*

Artificial Intelligence and Productivity

A widely discussed report from Glean, the Work AI Index 2026, surfaced interesting findings. By the survey's count, 87% of knowledge workers now use AI at work, 73% say it makes them more productive, and the average reported time savings comes to 13 hours a week. Those are individual self-assessments, however. When it comes to actual organizational outcomes, only 13% of those same workers say their organization is performing better as a result, suggesting that individual time savings are not automatically translating into measurable business improvements.[14] Glean's head of Work Innovation, Rebecca Hinds, has a name for part of the gap: “bot sitting,” the roughly 6.4 hours a week employees spend feeding context to AI systems, correcting their output, and cleaning up after them, invisible labor that eats into the time AI was supposed to free up. Sixty-nine percent of workers admit they have shipped AI-generated work they could not explain or defend if asked, a pattern the report labels “bot slop.”[15]

The dynamic is showing up in corporate budgets, too. Uber reportedly exhausted its 2026 AI tools budget well ahead of schedule due to higher than anticipated costs, and one technology executive noted that at some companies, the cost of the compute now runs ahead of the cost of the employees it was meant to support.[16] For investors, the relevant question isn't whether AI tools are useful; it's whether the productivity gains baked into AI-related earnings and capital spending assumptions are translating as cleanly as advertised. If a sizable share of “time saved” is being reallocated to managing the tools rather than higher-value work, the payback period on enterprise AI spending may run longer, and less predictably, than current stock market valuations assume.

AI Earnings Concentration Risk

A small group of companies, Nvidia, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), and CoreWeave among them, have built an increasingly interconnected web of investments and purchase commitments, where a sizable share of one company's revenue traces back to another company's investment in it.[17] Nvidia has committed up to $100 billion to OpenAI, which in turn uses Nvidia chips to build out data centers. Microsoft's roughly $13 billion stake in OpenAI has been delivered largely as Azure cloud credit, which OpenAI spends back with Microsoft. Oracle's $300 billion infrastructure agreement with OpenAI is filled mostly with Nvidia hardware, and Nvidia holds a stake in CoreWeave while supplying it chips, even as OpenAI holds its own stake in CoreWeave while buying its cloud capacity.[18]

Supporters call this a strategic necessity given how capital-intensive AI infrastructure has become and how scarce advanced chips remain.[19] Critics see something closer to the vendor financing arrangements of the dot-com era, in which companies effectively funded their own customers' purchases to inflate the appearance of organic demand. Investor Michael Burry, whose early, contrarian bet against the 2008 housing market was dramatized in the film The Big Short (one of my favorites if you haven't seen it), began shorting Nvidia and Palantir in late 2025 on similar grounds, and reiterated the comparison again in May.[20] Tech sector bond issuance reached roughly $428 billion in 2025, the cost of insuring against default by Oracle and Microsoft has nearly doubled since last fall, and Goldman Sachs recently raised its 2026 AI capital spending estimate to about $527 billion.[21] Whether this amounts to a bubble likely comes down to whether external, organic demand for AI products catches up to the revenue being generated inside this closed loop. If it does, the arrangement looks like ordinary supply chain financing. If it doesn't, the unwind could be sharp, given how concentrated these companies have become within major indexes.

Index Returns

Index / Indicator YTD Returns Through 6/30/2026

S&P 500 Index +10.21%

Russell 2000 Index (small caps) +22.57%

MSCI All Country World ex USA (international stocks) +13.05%

MSCI Emerging Markets Index +23.85%

Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index +1.15%

Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index +2.32%

Dow Jones Global Select REIT Index (real estate) +13.32%

Index returns sourced from Dimensional Fund Advisors Periodic Performance Report, 1/1/2026 – 6/30/2026.

Treasury Yields as of July 1, 2026

Yields (as of 7/1/2026)

Fed Funds Target Rate 3.75%

3-Month Treasury 3.85%

6-Month Treasury 4.00%

2-Year Treasury 4.17%

5-Year Treasury 4.24%

10-Year Treasury 4.48%

30-Year Treasury 4.97%

Treasury yields sourced from U.S. Department of the Treasury via Charles Schwab, as of July 1, 2026. Index returns are for illustrative purposes and do not reflect the returns of any actual investment. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

The S&P 500 finished the first half of the year up 10.21%, but the broader return picture tells a more interesting story. Emerging markets (+23.85%), small-cap U.S. stocks via the Russell 2000 (+22.57%), and international developed stocks (+13.05%) all outpaced the S&P 500 by a wide margin, a theme covered in more depth in my recent article, Is the S&P 500 Really All You Need?. Bonds were positive but modest, with the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate returning 1.15%. On the yield side, the 2-year Treasury at 4.17% sitting above the Fed Funds rate of 3.75%, and the 30-year rate approaching 5% signals a more normal-looking yield curve compared to recent years, when shorter-term rates were running even with or above long-term rates.

Portfolio Considerations

None of these stories are reason for alarm for a diversified investor, nor are they the whole story (I didn’t even touch on SpaceX's record IPO, which the initial stock prices arguably imply that its newer AI and computing bets pay off years down the line.) However, they raise a few questions worth considering:

1. How much of my equity exposure rides on a small number of mega-cap technology companies, and am I comfortable with that level of concentration if AI-related earnings growth slows?

2. Does my fixed income allocation account for a higher-for-longer, and possibly higher-still, rate environment, rather than the rate cuts that looked likely at the start of the year?

3. Has my time horizon or risk tolerance shifted in a way my portfolio hasn't caught up to yet?

4. If markets got bumpy over the next year or two, do I have enough in liquid reserves (keeping in mind that a diversified fixed income allocation can serve as a longer-term buffer) that I wouldn’t need to sell equity holdings to cover an unexpected expense or income disruption?

These are exactly the kinds of questions to work through together, in the context of a full financial picture rather than headline by headline.

Sources

Dimensional Fund Advisors, Periodic Performance Report, Monthly: 1/1/2026 – 6/30/2026, as of June 30, 2026. Index returns are for illustrative purposes and do not reflect the performance of any actual investment.
NPR, “Senate confirms Kevin Warsh as next chair of the Federal Reserve,” May 13, 2026; Federal Reserve Board press release, May 15, 2026; Brookings, “Who has to leave the Federal Reserve next?”
CNN Business, “Kevin Warsh nominated by Trump to be the next Federal Reserve chair,” January 30, 2026; CCN, “Kevin Warsh Officially Replaces Fed Chair Jerome Powell,” May 17, 2026.
CNBC, “Fed interest rate decision June 2026: Fed holds rates steady,” June 17, 2026; Lord Abbett, “June Fed Meeting: Policy Signals from the New Chairman.”
Lord Abbett, June 2026 FOMC analysis; Bondsavvy, “June 2026 Fed Dot Plot: What It Means for Money Market Yields.”
Polymarket, “Fed Decision in June? Trading Odds & Predictions 2026”; U.S. Bank, “Fed holds rates steady as new Chair Kevin Warsh commits to price stability.”
LPL Research and Hartford Funds historical analyses, as summarized in Focus Partners Wealth, “Geopolitical Conflict and Markets: A Brief History Lesson”; J.P. Morgan Wealth Management, “Crisis in the Middle East: Assessing Potential Market Impacts,” jpmorgan.com.
House of Commons Library, “Israel/US-Iran conflict 2026: Reopening the Strait of Hormuz”; Congressional Research Service, R45281.
CNBC, “Oil prices turn lower as U.S.-Iran ceasefire extension awaits Trump approval,” May 28, 2026; CNBC, “Oil drops 20% from 2026 peak,” May 29, 2026; House of Commons Library, op. cit.
NBC News, “Iran war ceasefire sends oil prices tumbling and stocks soaring,” April 9, 2026.
CBS News, “U.S. strikes targets in Iran after Iranian drone attack on cargo ship,” June 26, 2026; Al Jazeera, “US launches second night of strikes on Iran after ship hit by drone,” June 27, 2026; NPR, “U.S. strikes multiple targets in Iran in response to tanker attack,” June 27, 2026; CNN, “US launches more strikes on Iranian sites,” June 27, 2026.
Wikipedia, “Economic impact of the 2026 Iran war,” citing International Energy Agency characterization; Seeking Alpha, “Since 1953 This Is How The S&P 500 Has Performed After A Major Geopolitical Shock,” April 2026. Britannica, “2026 Iran war”; Wikipedia, “2026 Iran war.”
Glean, Work AI Index 2026, as discussed by Rebecca Hinds on The Cognitive Revolution; summarized in Biggo Finance, “Rebecca Hinds on the 13-Hour AI Lie.”
Ibid.
Fortune, “The AI economy could crash on mounting chip costs,” May 30, 2026.
Bloomberg, “AI Circular Deals: How Microsoft, OpenAI and Nvidia Keep Paying Each Other,” March 11, 2026; Wikipedia, “AI bubble.”
CraftedCharts, “AI Circular Financing: Nvidia, Microsoft & OpenAI”; Noah Smith, “Should we worry about AI's circular deals?”; Global Finance Magazine, “AI's Financial Circle Game.”
Noah Smith, op. cit.; Global Finance Magazine, op. cit.
Wikipedia, “AI bubble”; Global Finance Magazine, op. cit.
Investing.com, “2026: Another Year of AI Bubble Not Bursting?”; Fortune, op. cit.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Consumer prices up 9.1 percent over the year ended June 2022, largest increase in 40 years,” The Economics Daily, July 13, 2022, bls.gov.

Disclosures

Fiduciary Financial Advisors does not accept any liability for the use of the information discussed. Consult with a qualified financial, legal, or tax professional prior to taking any action. Before investing, consider investment objectives, risks, fees, and expenses. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss, including loss of principal. Past performance is no guarantee of future returns. The views and opinions reflected in the content are subject to change at any time without notice. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Some information was obtained from external sources. The information is believed to be accurate, but there is no guarantee that it is.

This commentary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment, tax, or legal advice. The views expressed reflect current conditions and are subject to change without notice.

Fiduciary Financial Advisors is a Registered Investment Adviser. Past performance is not indicative of future results, and there is no guarantee that any forecast or projection discussed will come to pass. Third-party data referenced above has not been independently verified by Fiduciary Financial Advisors.

CFP® and Certified Financial Planner® are certification marks owned by the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc., and are awarded to individuals who meet its education, examination, experience, and ethics requirements.

Elias Young 6/17/26 Elias Young 6/17/26

86% of California State Employees Are Handling Their Finances Alone.

Here’s What They May Be Missing.

More Blog Articles From Eli

If you work for the State of California, SMUD, Caltrans, CDCR, or any other CalPERS-covered employer, you have access to a strong retirement benefit package. A defined benefit pension, Savings Plus 401(k) and 457(b) options, and (depending on your role) Social Security coordination that often requires careful planning.

And yet, according to a recent financial preparedness survey of nearly 5,000 California state employees, the overwhelming majority of you are navigating all of that on your own.[1]

That’s not a judgment. It’s a data point. And it’s worth understanding why it matters.

What the Research Actually Says

The 2024 California State Employees Financial Preparedness Report, published by the California State Employees Association (CSEA) and based on a survey of active and retired state workers, found some numbers that are hard to ignore:[1]

86% of California state employees handle their own financial and retirement planning, relying on friends, family, and online resources rather than a professional advisor.

Only 14% use a professional financial advisor, compared to roughly 25% of Americans nationally.

When researchers asked why, the answers were familiar: it costs too much, I don’t have enough saved, I haven’t found someone I trust, or I just don’t think I need one.[1]

Those are all reasonable-sounding explanations. But here’s where the data gets interesting, because the same survey measured how those two groups actually feel about their financial lives.

The Confidence Gap You Can Measure

State employees with an advisor: 67% felt confident in their financial decision-making. State employees without an advisor: 39%.

State employees with an advisor: 53% said they were on track or ahead of schedule for retirement. State employees without an advisor: 27%.

That’s not a marginal difference. That’s roughly double the confidence and nearly double the retirement readiness, at least as self-reported.[2]

Now, correlation is not causation (people who seek out advisors may already be more financially engaged). But the gap is wide enough to raise a question worth sitting with: if you’re in the 86% handling your finances without professional guidance, what are the odds there are opportunities you haven’t fully considered?

What DIY Planning May Miss for CalPERS Employees

The reason this matters more for public employees than, say, someone with a basic 401(k) and no pension is that your benefits stack is notably complex. There are moving parts that interact with each other, and because some of those decisions (like your pension option election or retirement date) are difficult or impossible to undo, the cost of a misstep may compound over time.

Here are some of the areas where a qualified advisor tends to help clarify the picture for CalPERS members:

Pension Timing and Retirement Date Optimization

Your CalPERS benefit is calculated using a formula, and the timing of when you retire may significantly affect your monthly benefit for life. Retiring right before versus right after a birthday quarter, for example, may change your benefit factor. Many employees look at their pension estimate and assume that’s the number, without realizing that a few strategic adjustments to timing could increase their monthly income (or overlook the impact that a prior divorce may have if the pension benefit was part of the settlement).

And the stakes here differ depending on when you were hired. If you started with a CalPERS-covered employer before January 1, 2013, you’re a “Classic” member with a generally more generous benefit formula, and your final compensation is based on your highest 12 consecutive months of pay. If you were hired on or after that date, you fall under PEPRA (the Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act), which uses a generally less generous formula, a 36-month final compensation period, and a cap on the salary that counts toward your pension. (For simplicity, this overview focuses on miscellaneous members. Safety members and State Second Tier members have different formulas and benefit structures.)[3]

That’s a significant difference. A Classic member nearing retirement may have a richer benefit, but that also means more complex optimization decisions around timing, final comp windows, and retirement option elections. A PEPRA member, on the other hand, is generally working with a less generous formula, which may make supplemental savings strategy and tax planning that much more important for closing the gap between their pension income and the retirement lifestyle they want. Either way, understanding which set of rules applies to you (and how to work within them) is one of the areas where professional guidance may be worth exploring.

Savings Plus Strategy (the 401(k)/457(b) Decision)

If you’re a state employee, you have access to both a 401(k) and a 457(b) through Savings Plus, which means you may be able to contribute up to $49,000 per year in 2026 (or more if you’re over 50 or nearing retirement and eligible for catch-up provisions).[4] But many employees may not be maximizing both plans, and may not be thinking strategically about whether to use pre-tax, Roth, or a combination. The right answer depends on your current tax bracket, your expected pension income, your other sources of retirement income, and your timeline. This is especially true for PEPRA members, whose pension formula and pensionable pay cap may make supplemental savings through Savings Plus an important lever for building retirement security.

And if you work for an employer like SMUD that offers its deferred compensation through Fidelity rather than the Savings Plus/Nationwide platform, the investment options and fee structures are different, which may matter for how you allocate.

Social Security Coordination

Not every CalPERS member pays into Social Security (it depends on your employer’s specific arrangement).[5] For those who do, coordinating your pension income, Savings Plus distributions, and Social Security claiming strategy may noticeably affect your total after-tax retirement income. For those who don’t, understanding how that gap affects your overall plan may be just as important.

Tax Planning Around Retirement

Your CalPERS pension is fully taxable as ordinary income. So are distributions from your Savings Plus accounts (unless they’re Roth). If you’re retiring in California, where state income tax rates may run above 9% for many retirees, the difference between a tax-aware withdrawal strategy and just taking money as you need it may be larger than you’d think.

This is where Roth conversion planning in the years leading up to retirement tends to be especially valuable, and where DIY planners may not realize what options are available to them.

Why Most People Put This Off

(Even When They Know Better)

If you’ve been meaning to get your financial plan together "someday," you’re in very large company. Financial procrastination isn’t laziness. It’s usually one of a few predictable things:

The complexity feels overwhelming. CalPERS alone has multiple benefit formulas, PEPRA vs. Classic distinctions, reciprocity rules, and different employer contracts. Add in Savings Plus, Social Security, tax planning, and retirement timing decisions, and it’s understandable that many people just default to "I’ll figure it out later."

There’s no forcing function until retirement is close. Unlike a leaky roof or a check engine light, the consequences of not having a plan often don’t show up right away. But by the time they do (often in the form of a tax surprise, a suboptimal pension election, or a realization that you can’t retire when you planned), the window to fix things has narrowed.

Trust is a real barrier. The CSEA survey confirmed this.[1] Many state employees haven’t found an advisor they trust, and that’s an understandable concern. Not every advisor understands CalPERS benefits, Savings Plus options, or the specific planning challenges that come with public sector employment. Working with someone who doesn’t know your benefits package well can sometimes feel worse than doing it yourself.

What to Look for If You’re Considering Working with Someone

If you’re a CalPERS member who’s been thinking about getting professional guidance (even if you’ve been thinking about it for a while), here are a few things that tend to matter most:

Fiduciary standard. Look for an advisor who is legally required to act in your best interest, sometimes referred to as a fiduciary. That’s an important distinction worth understanding when evaluating any advisor relationship.

Familiarity with public sector employees and pension benefits. There’s a difference between a generalist financial planner and one who has experience working with pension benefits and public sector employees. Ask whether they’ve worked through pension optimization, deferred compensation strategy, and retirement tax planning with people whose benefits look like yours. Ask how many clients they serve in similar situations.

A comprehensive approach, not just one piece of the puzzle. A good financial plan for a CalPERS member doesn’t stop at a retirement projection. It connects your pension, your supplemental savings, your tax situation, and your investment strategy into a coordinated approach. Look for someone who ties these pieces together rather than addressing them in isolation.

The Bottom Line

You’ve built a career in public service, and the benefits you’ve earned along the way are valuable. But they’re also complex, and the gap between a good plan and no plan may be wider than you’d expect over the course of a retirement.

If you’re one of the 86% who’s been going it alone, that doesn’t mean you’ve been doing it wrong. It might just mean you haven’t found the right fit yet.

Interested in talking through your CalPERS benefits and how they fit into your bigger financial picture? You can schedule a no-obligation introductory conversation below.

Sources

California State Employees Association (CSEA). “2024 California State Employees Financial Preparedness Report.” Published 2024. Survey of nearly 5,000 active and retired California state employees conducted November 2023. N=3,817 active employees (95% confidence, ±2%), N=1,172 retirees (95% confidence, ±2%). Available at cseabenefitsprogram.com.
CSEA. “DIYing Your Own Retirement Savings Plan? Here’s What You Need to Know.” cseabenefitsprogram.com, 2024. National advisor usage estimate (25%) cited from 2022 Harris Poll. Confidence and retirement readiness comparisons derived from the 2024 Financial Preparedness Report.
CalPERS. “Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA).” calpers.ca.gov. PEPRA took effect January 1, 2013, establishing new benefit formulas, final compensation periods, and pensionable compensation caps for members hired on or after that date.
Internal Revenue Service. “401(k) limit increases to $24,500 for 2026; IRA limit increases to $7,500.” irs.gov, November 2025. The 401(k) and governmental 457(b) elective deferral limits are separate, allowing combined contributions of up to $49,000 ($24,500 each) before catch-up provisions.
CalPERS. “Social Security & Your CalPERS Pension.” calpers.ca.gov. Social Security coverage varies by employer arrangement. Non-covered positions (often safety classifications and certain State of California roles) do not withhold Social Security taxes. The Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and Government Pension Offset (GPO) were repealed by the Social Security Fairness Act, signed into law January 5, 2025.

Disclosures

This post is for educational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal, or investment advice. Please consult a qualified financial planner, CPA, and/or attorney before making decisions about your investments.

Investment advisory services are offered through Fiduciary Financial Advisors, a registered investment adviser. This material is for educational and informational purposes only and is not individualized investment, tax, or legal advice. Equity compensation rules are complex and outcomes depend on plan terms, trading windows, holding periods, and individual tax circumstances. Consult your CPA and/or attorney regarding your situation. Any performance shown is historical, for illustrative purposes, and does not indicate future results. Examples are not representative of all securities or outcomes and are not recommendations to buy or sell any security. Data may be obtained from third-party sources believed to be reliable but not independently verified.

Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. (CFP Board) owns the CFP® certification mark in the United States, which it authorizes use of by individuals who successfully complete CFP Board’s initial and ongoing certification requirements.

Elias Young 6/9/26 Elias Young 6/9/26

Is the S&P 500 Really All You Need?

Why Concentrating Everything in U.S. Large-Cap Stocks Is a Risk Most Investors Are Not Prepared For

More Blog Articles From Eli

If you spend any time in personal finance communities online, you have probably encountered the “VOO & Chill” crowd. The pitch is seductively simple: buy an S&P 500 index fund, hold forever, ignore everything else, and get rich. Why complicate it? The S&P 500 has crushed pretty much everything over the past 15 years. What more evidence do you need?

Quite a bit, actually.

And while we’re at it: this same crowd tends to be loudly, confidently against paying advisory fees. (More on that another time.)

The “just buy the S&P 500” strategy isn’t wrong because index investing is bad. Broadly diversified, low-cost index investing is one of the best things that happened to retail investors in the last 50 years. It’s wrong because it conflates an index fund with the only index you need. Concentrating everything in U.S. large-cap stocks is a real, identifiable risk. And history has handed us the receipts more than once. (Repeatedly. With interest.)

Let’s walk through it.

1. The Story the Last Decade Tells Is Not the Only Story

First, a quick vocabulary note. When people say “the S&P 500,” they mean an index of roughly 500 of the largest publicly traded companies in the United States, most of them household names: Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Nvidia, and so on. When you buy a fund that tracks the S&P 500, you essentially own a small slice of all of them at once. It’s a good idea, as far as it goes. The problem is the “as far as it goes” part.

It’s easy to understand why U.S. large caps look unbeatable right now. The S&P 500 delivered extraordinary returns through the 2010s and into the early 2020s, largely driven by a handful of mega-cap technology companies. If you owned an S&P 500 fund from 2010 to 2024, you were richly rewarded. International markets, emerging markets, small caps, and value stocks all lagged by comparison. It felt obvious: why own anything else?

That kind of thinking has a name: recency bias. It’s the tendency to assume that whatever has worked recently may keep working indefinitely. Think of it like driving while staring in the rearview mirror. The road behind you looked great. That says nothing about what’s ahead. In investing, recency bias tends to be one of the most expensive cognitive shortcuts you can make. (And to be clear, everyone makes it. The question is whether you catch yourself before it costs you.)

The historical record tells a more complicated story. According to Morgan Stanley Investment Management, international stocks have outperformed U.S. markets in four separate decades since World War II: the 1950s, the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 2000s. During those cycles, international stocks beat U.S. returns by a median of roughly 4.9% per year.[1] The current stretch of U.S. dominance is not the rule. It’s the exception. (An unusually long one, which is kind of the point.)

“The four most dangerous words in investing are: this time it’s different.” — Sir John Templeton

2. The Lost Decade: A Preview of What Concentration Can Cost You

The most recent example of what happens when U.S. large caps hit a wall is the 2000s, a period frequently called the “lost decade” for U.S. investors. The S&P 500 ended 2009 at roughly the same level it started in 2000. Zero price growth across an entire decade. When you factor in inflation, meaning the rising cost of everything around you, investors who went all-in on the index lost real purchasing power over that stretch.

What happened? Two brutal crashes. The dot-com crash starting in 2000 wiped out a wave of massively overvalued technology companies. Then the financial crisis of 2008 hit. The S&P 500 dropped roughly 49% from peak to bottom in the first crash, and roughly 57% in the second. (To put that in perspective: a 49% drop means you need a roughly 98% gain just to get back to where you started. And that’s before the second crash hit.) Investors who had loaded up on U.S. large and mega-cap growth stocks heading into 2000 got hit especially hard, because those were the most overvalued sectors going in. Sound familiar?

Meanwhile, investors who held international developed markets and emerging market stocks fared considerably better. International developed markets outpaced the S&P 500 for much of the decade, and emerging markets, those of countries like Brazil, India, China, and South Korea, performed even more strongly during parts of that period.[2] The diversified investor wasn’t celebrating, but they weren’t devastated either.

This is not ancient history. Anyone who retired in 2000 with a portfolio concentrated in U.S. large caps experienced what’s called sequence-of-returns risk at its most punishing: they were pulling money out of a portfolio that was falling hard in the early years of their retirement, which may permanently affect long-term financial security. And they didn’t get a warning. Nobody does.

3. Japan: The Cautionary Tale That Never Gets Old

For those who think extreme single-country concentration is only a theoretical concern, I give you Japan.

In the late 1980s, Japan was the investing world’s darling. Its economy had expanded at a remarkable pace for three decades. Japanese companies were buying American landmarks. The Nikkei 225, Japan’s rough equivalent of the S&P 500, gained more than 224% between 1985 and 1989 alone.[3] By late 1989, eight of the world’s top ten companies by market value were Japanese. Tokyo real estate had become so inflated that the grounds of the Imperial Palace were reportedly worth more than all of California. The general feeling, as one writer put it, was that the Japanese economic takeover of the world was inevitable.

You can probably guess where this is going.

The Nikkei peaked at 38,915 on December 29, 1989. It then fell nearly 80% from that peak over the following years and did not recover to that same level until 2024. That’s 34 years.[4] For most of that stretch, a Japanese investor who had put money into the Nikkei earned approximately 1.1% per year, and all of it came from dividends. The price of the index itself was essentially flat for three and a half decades.[5] Entire careers. Entire retirements. Flat.

The valuation context matters here. At the Nikkei’s 1989 peak, investors were paying roughly 60 to 70 times the annual earnings of those companies to own them. The global average at the time was around 15 to 16 times earnings.[6] Japanese stocks were priced at roughly four times what stocks elsewhere in the world cost, relative to what those companies actually earned. (Any of this sounding familiar yet?)

The lesson from Japan is not that this is likely to happen to the U.S. It is that it has happened, that it can happen, and that investors who assumed their home market was permanently exceptional paid an enormous price for that assumption.

4. Current U.S. Valuations Are Not Exactly a Bargain

Speaking of how much investors are paying relative to what companies earn.

One of the most widely used long-term valuation measures is something called the Shiller CAPE ratio. (CAPE stands for Cyclically Adjusted Price-to-Earnings. It’s a mouthful, so most people just call it the CAPE.) Instead of just looking at one year of earnings, it averages ten years of inflation-adjusted earnings to smooth out the natural ups and downs of the business cycle. The idea is to get a cleaner read on whether stocks are historically expensive or cheap.

According to J.P. Morgan Asset Management’s Guide to the Markets, as of March 31, 2026, the S&P 500’s Shiller CAPE ratio sits at 37.2x. The 30-year average for that same measure is 28.7x.[7] In other words, by this measure the market is trading at a roughly 30% premium to its own three-decade norm. The forward P/E ratio, which looks at expected earnings over the next twelve months rather than a historical average, sits at 19.7x versus a 30-year average of 17.2x. It currently sits just below the upper one standard deviation band of 20.5x, and was recently above it.7 (That matters: the market has only spent a relatively small portion of the last 30 years above that line.)

To be clear: elevated valuations don’t predict exactly when things may change or by how much. They are notoriously poor short-term timing tools. But research spanning decades of market data suggests that starting valuations are among the stronger predictors of what returns may look like over the next ten years. Higher starting valuations have historically corresponded with more modest returns over the decade that followed.[8] (Not doom and gloom. Just math.)

And by comparison? International developed market stocks were trading at a roughly 40% discount to U.S. stocks at the end of 2024, when you look at the same valuation measures. International small-cap stocks were nearly 30% below their own 20-year average and at an all-time low valuation relative to U.S. large caps. Emerging market stocks sat at a steep discount too.[9] In other words: all of the asset classes that the VOO & Chill crowd tends to skip were, at this particular moment in time, considerably cheaper than what they were choosing to concentrate in. (Worth noting.)

5. You Are Leaving Real Return Drivers on the Table

Here’s something that often gets lost in the “just buy the S&P 500” conversation: the S&P 500 is not a neutral, comprehensive exposure to stocks. It’s a specific bet on large and mega-cap U.S. companies, heavily weighted toward technology and growth. By owning only that, you are actively excluding return drivers that decades of academic research suggest are real and persistent.

In 1992, economists Eugene Fama and Kenneth French published research showing that two additional characteristics beyond just “own stocks” explain a large chunk of why some portfolios have outperformed others over time.[10] The first is size: smaller companies have historically outperformed larger ones over long periods. The second is value: companies that are cheap relative to what they actually own or earn have historically outperformed more expensive, high-flying “growth” companies. Later research added a third factor, profitability: companies with strong, durable profits have tended to outperform weaker ones. (Fama won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2013, partially for this work. It’s not a fringe idea.)

In plain English: history suggests that owning smaller, cheaper, more profitable companies alongside large ones has tended to produce stronger long-term results than owning only the biggest, most expensive ones. The S&P 500 is almost entirely the biggest, most expensive companies in one country. It’s roughly the opposite of what the research points toward.

The size premium, meaning the extra return small-cap stocks have historically delivered over large caps, has averaged roughly 1.5% to 3.5% per year going back to 1926 in U.S. data. The value premium has averaged roughly 3% to 5% per year.[11] These don’t show up every year. But over decades, they tend to compound. Ignoring them entirely isn’t a neutral choice. It’s a bet against them.

Dimensional Fund Advisors has built its entire investment approach around systematically tilting toward these kinds of companies, while staying broadly diversified. Over the 20 years ending December 31, 2022, more than 92% of their funds outperformed their benchmark indexes, compared to roughly 30% of the broader fund industry.[12] That difference is not a coincidence.

The investor concentrated entirely in U.S. large caps isn’t just ignoring other countries. They’re actively betting against decades of research by concentrating in the largest, most expensive companies in one market. (And the fee savings from skipping an advisor to get there don’t exactly cover that tradeoff.)

6. You Cannot Rebalance What You Do Not Have

One of the underrated advantages of holding multiple asset classes is what diversification lets you do during volatile markets: rebalance.

Rebalancing just means periodically trimming the parts of your portfolio that have grown and adding to the parts that have fallen. If your international stocks drop 20% while your U.S. stocks hold steady, rebalancing means shifting some money from U.S. stocks into international, buying more of what got cheaper. It sounds obvious. In practice, it’s psychologically brutal because it requires buying the thing that just fell, which feels terrible. That’s exactly why it tends to add value: most people won’t do it.

When international stocks were getting crushed in 2011 and 2012, an investor with a diversified portfolio could systematically shift money toward them at lower prices. When U.S. small caps lagged badly in the early 2000s, the diversified investor was buying them on sale. Both positions eventually recovered and then some.

An investor who only owns an S&P 500 fund has nothing to rebalance into. There’s no other bucket to draw from, and no underperforming asset class to add to at a discount. Every market swing is just a passive ride. You eliminate one of the few systematic, evidence-based advantages available to long-term investors. (And then potentially panic sell at the bottom. Which is its own expensive problem.)

The concept is simple: the less your asset classes move in lockstep with each other, the more rebalancing may benefit you. U.S. stocks, international stocks, small companies, value companies, and emerging markets each tend to respond differently to different economic environments. That’s a feature. Not a bug.

7. The “All You Need” Narrative Already Has Cracks in It

One of the most persistent arguments for the S&P 500-only approach is that it’s simply worked. And for the last 15 years, that’s been largely true. But zoom out even a little, and the narrative starts to look shakier than the Reddit threads suggest.

Take 2025. The S&P 500 had a strong year, finishing with a total return of roughly 18%.[13] A well-diversified portfolio would have owned that. But it also could have owned international small-cap stocks, which finished the year at roughly 33%, and emerging market stocks, those in developing economies like India, Brazil, and parts of Asia, which also finished at roughly 33%.[14] (That’s not a typo.) An investor who only held the S&P 500 captured none of those additional return sources. An investor who held the S&P 500 alongside a broader mix had exposure to all of them.

The point isn’t that one portfolio configuration “won” 2025. It’s that concentrating entirely in the S&P 500 meant leaving additional return sources completely off the table in a year when they happened to perform well. That’s what concentration tends to cost you: not always, not in every year, but sometimes, and often when you least expect it.[15]

The “all you need is an S&P 500 fund” argument tends to rely on a very specific, very recent window of data to make its case. The moment you step outside that window, the argument gets a lot less convincing.

8. Concentration Risk Is Hidden Inside the Index Itself

Here’s a wrinkle that surprises a lot of people: even within the S&P 500, the “500 companies” label is a bit misleading in terms of actual diversification.

The S&P 500 is what’s called a market-cap weighted index. That means the bigger a company is, the more of the index it represents. It’s not 500 equal slices. It’s 500 companies where the largest ones carry a dramatically disproportionate share of the weight. As of 2025, the top ten companies alone accounted for roughly 40% of the entire index.[16] So when you buy an S&P 500 fund, about 40 cents of every dollar you invest is going into just ten companies, most of them in the technology sector.

When Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Meta, and a few others are collectively worth as much as the remaining 490 companies combined, you are not holding a diversified basket. You are holding an index that moves largely with the fortunes of a very small number of businesses in a single sector. (You can own all 500 companies and still be highly concentrated. That’s a feature of market-cap weighting that doesn’t get nearly enough attention.)

That concentration inside the index compounds the concentration risk that already comes from ignoring every other type of stock in the world. It’s concentration on concentration.

Putting It Together

None of this is an argument against index investing, against owning U.S. stocks, or against the S&P 500 as part of a portfolio. It’s a fine building block. The keyword there is “building block.”

The argument is against treating it as the complete structure.

A thoughtfully diversified portfolio, one that includes exposure to international developed markets, emerging markets, smaller companies, and value-oriented stocks alongside U.S. large caps, isn’t more complicated for its own sake. It’s built to capture multiple return drivers at once, rebalance opportunistically through market cycles, avoid excessive concentration in any single country, sector, or style, and not depend entirely on the continuing outperformance of one corner of one market.

History suggests that exclusive faith in any single market, at any price, is a plan that eventually gets tested. The Japanese investor in 1989 had a decade of evidence that their market only went up. The U.S. dot-com investor in 1999 had years of extraordinary returns that made the strategy feel obvious. The investor concentrating entirely in U.S. large caps today has a similar recent run to point to.

That’s not a track record. That’s a recent stretch of strong performance. And history has a way of eventually testing both.

(And as for the idea that you don’t need an advisor to help you think through any of this: the research on what good financial planning actually delivers doesn’t exactly support the “just buy VOO and skip the fees” thesis. If you’re curious, I wrote about it here.)

Sources

Morgan Stanley Investment Management. “The International Rebalance.” 2024. International stocks have outperformed U.S. markets in four separate decades since WWII — the 1950s, 1970s, 1980s, and 2000s — beating U.S. returns by a median of 4.9% CAGR during those cycles.
Larson Financial Services. “A Diversification Reminder: International Stocks Outperforming U.S. Stocks.” March 2026. From 2000–2009, international developed markets outperformed the S&P 500 by a wide margin; emerging markets performed even more strongly during parts of that stretch.
Wikipedia. “Japanese Asset Price Bubble.” The Nikkei 225 gained more than 224% from January 1985 to its peak on December 29, 1989, closing at 38,915.87.
Wikipedia. “Nikkei 225.” The index hit an intraday post-bubble low of 6,994.90 on October 28, 2008 — approximately 82% below its 1989 peak. It surpassed its 1989 closing high on February 22, 2024, 34 years later.
Money For the Rest of Us. “Japan’s 34-Year Market Underperformance.” Through end of January 2024, the MSCI Japan index returned approximately 1.1% annualized over the full period — all of it from dividends, with essentially zero price return.
A Frugal Doctor. “Japan’s Lost Decades: 30 Years of Negative Returns from the Nikkei 225.” At the Nikkei’s 1989 peak, the P/E ratio was approximately 60x trailing twelve-month earnings vs. a global average of roughly 15–16x.
J.P. Morgan Asset Management. “Guide to the Markets — U.S.” Q2 2026, as of March 31, 2026. S&P 500 valuation measures: Forward P/E 19.7x vs. 30-year average 17.2x; CAPE (Shiller P/E) 37.2x vs. 30-year average 28.7x; +1 standard deviation band 20.5x. Source: Bloomberg, FactSet, Moody’s, Refinitiv Datastream, Robert Shiller, Standard & Poor’s, J.P. Morgan Asset Management.
Invesco / Robert Shiller data. “Applied Philosophy: The Shiller P/E and S&P 500 Returns Revisited.” March 2025. CAPE ratio shows predictive power for 10-year forward returns with R-squared of approximately 0.78 (1983–2015 sample).
Artisan Partners. “International Small Cap: A Strategic Asset Class.” December 2024. At end of 2024, the S&P 500 was 50% above its 20-year average P/E multiple; the MSCI EAFE Small Cap Index was nearly 30% below its 20-year average P/E and at an all-time low valuation vs. U.S. large caps. Emerging markets trading at approximately 40% P/E discount to U.S.
Fama, Eugene F. and Kenneth R. French. “The Cross-Section of Expected Stock Returns.” Journal of Finance, 1992. “Common Risk Factors in the Returns on Stocks and Bonds.” Journal of Financial Economics, 1993.
Ryan O’Connell, CFA. “Fama-French Three-Factor Model: Beyond CAPM.” Size premium (SMB) historically approximately 1.5–3.5% annually in U.S. data since 1926. Value premium (HML) historically approximately 3–5% annually.
Dimensional Fund Advisors. “The Evolution of Small Cap Investing: Four Decades of Innovation.” August 2023. Over the 20 years ending December 31, 2022, 92% of Dimensional’s funds outperformed their prospectus benchmarks vs. approximately 30% industry-wide.
First Trust Advisors / RBC Wealth Management. “The S&P 500 Index 2025 Recap” and “U.S. Equity Returns in 2025.” January 2026. S&P 500 total return (including dividends) for full-year 2025 was approximately 17.9%.
MSCI Index Factsheet. “MSCI Emerging Markets Index (USD).” Full-year 2025 annual return: 33.57%. MSCI ACWI ex-USA Small Cap Value full-year 2025 return: approximately 33.26% (YCharts, as of February 2026).
MFS Investment Management. “International Large-Cap Value: The Forgotten Asset Class.” 2025/2026. The rolling five-year stretch of U.S. outperformance vs. EAFE Value as of December 31, 2024 was the longest in the past 40 years; the degree of relative outperformance had never been witnessed in history in terms of magnitude.
Visual Capitalist / Evaluator Funds. “The U.S. Stock Market vs. Rest of World (1979–2025).” As of 2025, the top 10 companies’ share of the S&P 500 accounted for approximately 40–41% of total index weight.

Disclosures

Elias Young 4/20/26 Elias Young 4/20/26

Your Finances Called. They've Been Waiting (Right Behind That New Year's Resolution)

More Blog Articles From Eli

Let's just say it out loud: you already know what you need to do with your money. You've known for a while. Maybe months. Maybe longer. Get that investment account set up. Actually look at your retirement contributions. Make a plan. Talk to someone. You've thought about it in the shower, during your commute, at 2 a.m. when the ceiling won't stop staring back at you. And yet here you are. Still thinking about it.

You're in excellent company, by the way. A tragically enormous amount of company.

The New Year's Resolution Hall of Shame

How's that working out?

Spoiler: it's not.

Research shows that only 9% of people actually keep their New Year's resolutions throughout the year.[1] Nine. Percent. That means 91 out of every 100 people who made a big, bold declaration on January 1st are quietly abandoning ship. And it doesn't take long: 23% quit within the first week, and 64% have thrown in the towel by the end of the first month.[2] Strava, a fitness tracking app with hundreds of millions of data points, named the second Friday of January "Quitter's Day," because it's the single most popular day for people to give up on their goals.[2]

The second Friday of January. We can't even make it three weeks.

Among those who set resolutions in 2024, 49% said they had abandoned them entirely by the end of February (and let me remind you, it's already April), with 40% having done so in January alone.[3] And here's the kicker: 80% of goal-setters feel completely confident they'll stick to their resolutions throughout the year.[4] The confidence isn't the problem. The follow-through is.

Sound familiar? That's because it's the same story playing out in personal finance, year after year.

The Financial Version Is So Much Worse

Here's where the New Year's resolution problem and the financial inaction problem converge into something genuinely uncomfortable.

According to a CNBC survey, 53% of Americans say they're behind schedule on retirement planning and savings.[5] More than half. (I'll say it again. More than half....) A separate study from Allianz Life found that 64% of Americans worry more about running out of money than they worry about dying.[6] (Turns out the old joke about dying with your last check bouncing isn't so funny when it starts to feel like a real possibility.) And yet, according to a Schwab study, only 36% of Americans have a written financial plan.[7]

People are scared. They know they're behind. And they still aren't doing anything about it.

Meanwhile, 68% of Americans near or in retirement say they will need to delay retirement because they don't have enough saved,[8] and 64% of Americans wish they had started saving before age 25, even though the average starting age is 28.[8] A handful of years doesn't sound like much until you remember the 8th wonder of the world: compound interest. (Now ask yourself: how much longer can you afford to wait?)

And before you say "it's too late for me anyway," no. It's not. You just could have started sooner.

Research on procrastination and personal finance confirms what the data shows: procrastinators are significantly less likely to participate in savings plans, tend to initiate saving later, and are less likely to save a fixed amount every month. Procrastinators are also about nine percentage points less likely to have a will or trust, and report lower retirement satisfaction overall.[10] The delay doesn't just cost money. It costs peace of mind. (Funny enough, I wrote about exactly this. Read it here.)

You're Not Lazy. You're Human. (But Also, Come On.)

Here's what the research actually says about why we don't do the things we know we should do with our money.

Experts define financial procrastination as voluntarily delaying planning or implementing finance-related decisions, despite expecting to be worse off for the delay.[11] One researcher at Carleton University described the core problem this way: "You know what you ought to do and you're not able to bring yourself to do it. It's that gap between intention and action."[12]

That gap? It's enormous. And in personal finance, it can be expensive. (Ah, expensive. Maybe that's the word that finally gets you moving.)

The psychology behind it is called "present bias," which is our brain's tendency to prioritize immediate rewards over future benefits. Saving for retirement thirty years from now doesn't trigger the same urgency as whatever is happening right now. The future version of you who needs that money feels abstract. The discomfort of sitting down and actually dealing with it feels very, very real.[11] (Which is probably why it's easier to replay every financial decision you wish you could take back than to actually sit down and make a plan. That can't just be me.)

Meanwhile, 35% of people cite losing motivation as their top reason for giving up on goals, followed by being too busy (19%) and shifting priorities (18%).[2] Too busy. Too tired. Too overwhelmed. (Time to consider hiring a pro yet??) The reasons are real, and they will always be there. There will never be a perfect window of time when everything clears up, your inbox is empty, and the stars align for you to finally sort out your financial life. Waiting for that window is its own financial strategy. A terrible one. (Which is probably why the IRS has an annual deadline on April 15th... unlike your financial plan.)

"I'll Start When the Market Settles Down": A Love Story

You know what's fascinating about financial procrastination? It never feels like procrastination while you're doing it. We tell ourselves it's prudence. Like waiting for the right moment. Like doing more research first. Like waiting to see what the market does.

There is always a reason to wait. Markets are too volatile. Markets are too calm. The economy is uncertain. Tax laws might change. You don't have enough saved to make it worth starting yet. You're not sure which account to open. You want to understand it better before you commit.

Research confirms that the gap between intention and action grows the further the action is placed in the future.[11] Translation: the longer you wait to deal with your finances, the easier it gets to keep waiting. And each month of delay represents compounding growth potential that has passed. It doesn't come back. (And please don't tell me you're waiting to buy the dip...)

The research also notes that procrastination in financial decisions is essentially irrational behavior: a core characteristic is the realization by the actor that one will be worse off because of the delay, yet the delay happens anyway.[10]

You already know this.

You've probably known it for years.

And yet, still waiting.

Probably still thinking about it.

What Actually Changes Things

Studies show that people who set up a way to be accountable for their financial goals are far more likely to achieve them.[1] Not just more motivated. More likely to actually follow through. (Ahem... funny how that works.)

Accountability. Structure. Someone who can provide perspective, ask relevant questions, and help you evaluate potential next steps.

That's exactly what a consultation is. It's not a commitment to overhaul your entire financial life in one afternoon. It's not signing anything or locking yourself into anything. It's a conversation, a structured one, where you stop spinning in your own head and start actually moving. Where someone helps you figure out what's most important to address first, and what a realistic path forward actually looks like.

Columbia University research shows that while nearly half of Americans make New Year's resolutions, only about 25% stay committed after just 30 days, and fewer than 10% accomplish their goals.[13] (Now contrast that with the 94% of households advised by a CFP® professional who feel confident in their ability to achieve their financial goals.[14] Funny how having a plan and a pro in your corner tends to change things.) The people who do succeed don't have more willpower or more money or more time than you. They have a system. They have support. They stopped trying to figure it all out alone.

So Here's the Part Where I Call You Out (Lovingly)

You've read this far. Which means some part of you is nodding along, maybe a little uncomfortably, thinking yeah, this is me. Good. That recognition is the first step.

The second step is embarrassingly simple: schedule the consultation.

Not "look into it." Not "think about reaching out soon." Not "maybe after things calm down a little." Now, seriously.... While the itch is still there. Because the data is brutally clear: the longer the gap between intention and action (remember that study I just referenced above), the wider it gets, until one day you look up and realize you've been "meaning to get your finances sorted out" for five years, and the compounding you missed doesn't care about your intentions.

You deserve more than five more years of thinking about it. (And realize, I've been trying to reach some of you for almost that long already.)

The hardest part is genuinely just making the appointment. Everything after that? That's what I'm here for.

(This post was lovingly inspired by that tax return that I kept putting off. Which I got to eventually... remember... there's an actual deadline... unlike your financial plan.)

References & Sources

Fisher College of Business, Ohio State University. "Why Most New Year's Resolutions Fail." Lead Read Today. fisher.osu.edu
Inside Out Mastery. "19 Surprising New Year's Resolution Statistics (2024 Updated)." insideoutmastery.com
The Harris Poll, conducted on behalf of Origin Financial, January 13–15, 2025 (n=3,059 U.S. adults). Published by Origin Financial: "The New Year Called – It Wants Its Resolutions Back." useorigin.com
Drive Research. "New Year's Resolutions Statistics and Trends." driveresearch.com
CNBC / SurveyMonkey. "53% of Americans Surveyed Feel They Are Behind on Their Retirement Savings." cnbc.com
Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America. "Americans Are More Worried About Running Out of Money Than Death." 2025 Annual Retirement Study, Allianz Center for the Future of Retirement (January/February 2025, n=1,000). allianzlife.com
Charles Schwab. "2024 Modern Wealth Survey." Conducted by Logica Research, March 2024 (n=1,000). aboutschwab.com
Voya Financial / F&G Annuities. "Facing Delayed Retirement, Many Americans Wish They Had Started Saving Sooner." PLANADVISER. planadviser.com
Ahead App. "Why Procrastination in Retirement Planning Costs You a Comfortable Future." ahead-app.com
Shah, R. & Mukherjee, A. "Procrastination in Personal Finance: Implications for Estate Planning and Retirement Satisfaction." ScienceDirect, 2025. sciencedirect.com
Svartdal, F. et al. "Procrastination and Personal Finances: Exploring the Roles of Planning and Financial Self-Efficacy." Frontiers in Psychology, 2019. frontiersin.org
Pychyl, T. "Why Wait? The Science Behind Procrastination." Association for Psychological Science. psychologicalscience.org
CBS News / Columbia University. "New Year's Resolutions Often Don't Last. Here's Why They Fail." cbsnews.com
CFP Board. "Trust. Confidence. Impact: 2025 Financial Planning Longitudinal Study." cfp.net

Investment advisory services are offered through Fiduciary Financial Advisors, a registered investment adviser. This article is for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as personalized investment, tax, or legal advice. Any references to scheduling a consultation are for general informational purposes and do not create an advisory relationship. Third-party research, statistics, and survey data cited are believed to be reliable but have not been independently verified. All data is subject to change. References to CFP® professionals relate to industry research and do not imply that any specific outcome will be achieved.

Elias Young 3/9/26 Elias Young 3/9/26

You Have Company Stock. Now What?

*RSUs, stock options, and why the thing stopping most people isn’t knowledge. It’s inertia.*

More Blog Articles From Eli

If you have RSUs vesting every quarter and stock options you’ve been meaning to deal with, you’re probably overdue for a plan. (You probably know that already).

This post covers the key tax rules, a three-part framework for deciding what to do with a concentrated position, and the one thing that stops most people from following through even when they know exactly what they should be doing.

The framework works whether your concentration came from equity comp, stock purchases, or inheritance. And it’s worth noting upfront: equity is rarely the only moving piece in someone’s financial life. A plan that accounts for all aspects of your finances is likely to result in a better outcome than one that treats the stock in isolation.

The Tax Rules, Without the Jargon (OK, Maybe There Is Some Jargon After All)

*Figure 1: RSUs, NSOs, ISOs, and PSUs side by side. When tax is owed, what type of tax applies, and what to watch out for.*

When RSUs vest, income tax is triggered on whatever they’re worth on that day, whether you sell them or not. So, holding onto vested RSUs is less of a tax move than a choice to keep owning your company’s stock (you will be taxed at either short-term or long-term capital gains rates on the growth after they vest). It’s also common practice for employers to withhold federal taxes at 22% when RSUs vest. Depending on your situation, your actual rate may differ, so it’s worth planning ahead and making sure you have the cash set aside for your tax bill if you are in a higher tax bracket. [1,2,3]

NSOs work differently, and there are two separate tax events to keep track of. The first happens when you exercise: the difference between your exercise price and the current market value of the shares gets taxed as ordinary income right then, regardless of whether you sell. The second happens when you eventually sell: any additional gain from that point forward is a capital gain. If you sell within a year of exercising, that gain is taxed as a short-term capital gain at your ordinary income rate. Hold for more than a year before selling, and it qualifies as a long-term capital gain, which may carry a lower rate than ordinary income, though that depends on your income level and overall tax situation. The key thing to understand is that these are two distinct events with two different tax treatments, and they don’t offset each other. [1]

ISOs can get you better tax treatment: if you hold the shares for at least two years from the grant date and one year from when you exercised, your gains typically get taxed at the lower capital gains rate instead of as regular income. Two things to watch out for, though. First, exercising ISOs can potentially trigger AMT, a parallel tax calculation that could create a bill even before you’ve sold anything. Second, there’s a $100,000 annual cap on ISOs, and anything above that is treated like an NSO. The tax benefit is real, but so is the risk. If the stock drops before you hit the holding period, you can lose actual money even while technically qualifying for the favorable rate. The right call depends on how much risk you’re comfortable taking with the holding period you choose. [4,5]

Why Concentration Is Riskier Than It Feels

Figure 2: Eight stocks compared to DFEOX - DFA U.S. Core Equity 1 Fund (~2,700 stocks). Same six years, 2020-2025, cumulative total return with dividends reinvested. AAPL: +284%; MSFT: +223%; AMZN: +150%; RTX: +140%; DFEOX: +118%; Ford: +89%; PFE: -11%; PTON: -83%. Sources: *totalrealreturns.com* *(AAPL, MSFT, AMZN, RTX, F, PFE, PTON);* *finance.yahoo.com* *(DFEOX)*
This illustration uses a limited set of widely recognized companies for educational purposes and is not representative of all outcomes. The securities shown were selected solely as examples; this is not a recommendation. Performance shown is historical and does not indicate future results.

Harry Markowitz published his groundbreaking paper in 1952, showing that diversification can reduce risk for a given level of expected return, compared with concentrating in a single investment. (He won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1990 for the work.) Not exactly a hot take at this point, but worth understanding why. When you own a single stock, you carry the risk that’s specific to that company: a bad earnings quarter, a leadership change, a regulatory problem, PR issues, whatever. That’s sometimes referred to as uncompensated risk, meaning you’re potentially taking on extra volatility that isn’t necessarily rewarded with higher expected returns. Spreading across many stocks reduces that layer, because when one company hits a rough patch, others don’t necessarily follow. If you’ve generated meaningful wealth from a concentrated position, it may be worth taking some risk off the table and diversifying, rather than letting it all ride. [6]

What the chart shows is that outcomes would have varied depending on which stock you happened to hold (if you held one of them). Apple and Microsoft both ended up towards the top over the full period, but each fell roughly 26-28% in 2022, which means even the highest performers in the period had rough patches. RTX also outpaced the fund (eventually). Amazon performed a little better, but with a bumpier ride. Peloton (which was up over 400% at its peak in 2020) collapsed to an 82% cumulative loss by 2025. Ford spiked +137% in 2021 on EV optimism, then gave back most of it the following year, and eventually trailed the fund over the full six years. Pfizer surged +67% in 2021 on vaccine demand, then spent the next four years in decline, ending with a negative total return including dividends. (If you want to see more cautionary tales of volatility from brands you probably recognize, just go look up AMC, Boeing, Bed Bath & Beyond, Anheiser Busch, etc….)

DFEOX (a fund with ~2,700 stocks) returned +118% over the same period. Not the best outcome on this list, but not the worst by a long shot, either, and without the same level of risk that is carried when holding a single company. That’s the core of what diversification actually does: it doesn’t guarantee the best return, but it can reduce the impact of extreme single-company outcomes.

Now, keep in mind that when you are looking at this graphic, the intent is to show you a range of outcomes from familiar companies (many of which issue equity compensation).

Research suggests over 100 distinct ways advisors add value across planning domains.¹³ Effective advisors go deep on services most relevant to their clients' needs.

The Three-Sleeve Framework

If you have a concentrated position, you probably already know, on some level, that you should probably take some risk off the table (probably). The issue isn’t awareness. It’s (probably) follow-through. You may fully intend to make a move, and then something stops you. Not because you’re reckless. Because the decision is genuinely hard to make in the moment. The stock may have done well recently, so maybe it keeps going up, and selling now gives you feelings of FOMO. Or it’s down, and selling now feels like locking in a loss. There’s a seemingly good reason to wait either way. So the position just keeps sitting there.

So, here’s where the Three-Sleeve Framework comes into play. Instead of telling yourself you’re going to make a well-timed decision every quarter, you set up a structure in advance and follow it (similar to dollar cost averaging, but in reverse and with shares).

You may also tie it to something real: a home purchase, a college fund, an earlier retirement. Selling with a clear purpose increases the likelihood that it actually happens. Whereas selling as a vague risk-reduction idea could get pushed to next quarter indefinitely (go look at the last graphic again if you need more convincing you’d do otherwise). A financial planner can help you connect the dots between what you’re working toward and how much stock you should sell to get there. Once you have that picture, you divide the position into three parts:

Immediate sale: Sell this piece soon, without waiting for a better price, then reinvest the proceeds. Its only job is to get the ball rolling and start bringing your concentration down.

Indefinite sleeve: Set this aside with no real plan to sell it. It’s your way of staying in the game if the stock takes off. It also makes it a lot easier to sell everything else, because you haven’t completely walked away. (You’re not giving up on the company. You’re just being sensible about the rest.)

Systematic liquidation: Sell this in equal pieces on a fixed schedule over four or five years, regardless of what the stock is doing at the time, and reinvest it accordingly. This is the hardest part to stick to, and usually the most valuable.

The Hardest Part: Actually Doing It

Most quarters, there’s going to be a good reason not to sell. When the stock is up, selling feels like leaving money on the table (look at the chart again, and ask yourself if you’d be diversifying your Microsoft or Apple stock). When it’s down, selling feels like locking in a loss (Again, now go look at Peloton or Pfizer). Both reactions are understandable. Together, they mean nothing ever happens.

The solution is a fixed schedule you set up ahead of time (when you were thinking clearly) plus someone who makes sure the trades actually go through. One of the more underrated things a financial planner brings to the table is that they can handle the implementation directly. The trades go through without having to pass through your emotional filter, avoiding a potential last-minute hesitation.

And because your equity is one piece of a larger financial picture, a planner can also make sure what you’re doing with the stock actually makes sense alongside everything else.

Option Timing: The Leverage Test and the NSO Counterintuition

Figure 4: The Leverage Test. Divide your exercise price by the current stock price. A higher ratio means more amplification from holding; as the ratio falls, the case for exercising tends to strengthen.

An unexercised option lets you participate in the stock’s upside without putting up any money or owing any taxes yet. That’s a pretty unusual combination, and it’s worth understanding before you take action. A common practice is to exercise as soon as possible to get the capital gains clock running, but I’m going to suggest there is something else you need to consider first called The Leverage test.

The leverage test is a way to gauge how much of that amplification you’re getting on your stock option. Divide your exercise price by the current stock price. When that ratio is high, the option still moves a lot more than the stock, which means you’re getting real leverage from holding. As it falls, that amplification fades, and the case for exercising tends to get stronger. That said, the ratio is only part of the picture. The company’s health and trajectory matter too, and a high ratio may not be as meaningful if there are real questions about where the business is headed (remember the whole concentration thing we just finished talking about).

Also if you’re planning on leaving the company, your plan documents will tell you how long you have to exercise before the options expire due to leaving the company. It varies, so it’s worth looking that up before you give notice. [7]

For NSOs, exercising early to start the capital gains clock often doesn’t work out the way people expect. The moment you exercise, you pay the purchase price plus income taxes on the gain so far. That immediately shrinks the number of shares you have left working for you (assuming you sell off some shares to take care of the tax bill). If you wait, all of your options keep compounding. Yes, you’ll face a higher tax bill later, but because taxes are a percentage of whatever you gain, that larger bill reflects a larger gain, and in some scenarios, you may keep more after taxes, but outcomes depend on future stock performance, timing, and your tax situation. This logic only holds if the stock continues to grow. If the company stalls or declines, waiting can work against you.

It’s worth calling out that ISOs are a different story. For those, exercising earlier while the spread is still small probably makes more sense, since it may help reduce or avoid AMT exposure down the road. The right call depends on the type of option you have, your tax situation, and where the company is headed (again, an unknown that warrants thinking about reducing concentration). [1]

More Things Worth Thinking About

• The 22% RSU withholding. It’s common practice, but it may not cover your actual tax rate. It’s worth factoring that into your planning so a shortfall doesn’t catch you off guard. [2,3]

• RSUs piling up without a decision. Every time shares vest and you don’t sell, you’re effectively choosing to hold more concentrated stock. That might be fine, but it’s worth making that call intentionally rather than by default by inaction. [2]

• Exercising NSOs early for the capital gains clock. For NSOs, this often reduces the number of shares left compounding and can leave you with less after taxes, not more - though the right answer depends on the company’s trajectory. ISOs work differently: exercising earlier while the spread is small can sometimes reduce AMT exposure. [1]

• Skipping the AMT conversation before exercising ISOs. Exercising can potentially trigger AMT even when you haven’t sold anything yet. Worth a conversation with a CPA before you act. [4,5]

• Not tracking your cost basis. Knowing what you originally paid for your shares, and when, matters a lot when it comes to calculating gains and managing your tax bill. It’s important to not lose track of, especially across multiple grants and exercise dates (surprisingly even in this day and age, this typically isn’t automatically tracked within the account the shares are held in). [1]

• Treating your company’s stock like it can’t go wrong. Even very good companies can hit rough patches. The risk of owning a single stock is real, and it doesn’t go away just because you work there. [6]

Ready to Talk It Through?

If you’ve read this far, you’ve probably noticed how quickly the moving pieces add up. Keeping the rules straight across RSUs, NSOs, ISOs, and PSUs is one thing. Figuring out the optimal strategy for the specific type you have is another. And then there’s the question of how your equity comp fits alongside everything else in your financial life.

The complexity is especially amplified when you also have multiple, or even all of the above types of equity compensation. (I recently ran into this, and it was the catalyst for putting this article together.

If you want help sorting through your own situation, I’d enjoy the conversation.

Sources

All factual claims draw on primary sources: IRS publications, statutory tax code, peer-reviewed academic research, and one practitioner reference for the option exercise framework.

[1] Internal Revenue Service: Topic No. 427: Stock Options Authoritative IRS overview of ISO and NSO tax treatment: when income is recognized, how it is taxed, and required reporting forms.

[2] Internal Revenue Service: Publication 525: Taxable and Nontaxable Income IRS publication covering the tax treatment of various compensation types, including stock-based compensation. Confirms that RSU income is recognized at vesting as ordinary income and reported on Form W-2.

[3] Internal Revenue Service: Publication 15 (Circular E): Employer's Tax Guide Establishes the 22% flat supplemental wage withholding rate (37% on amounts above $1 million) that applies to RSU vesting income.

[4] Cornell Law LII: 26 U.S. Code § 422: Incentive Stock Options Full statutory text of IRC Section 422: qualifying disposition holding periods (2 years from grant, 1 year from exercise), the $100,000 annual ISO cap, and conditions under which favorable tax treatment is lost.

[5] Internal Revenue Service: Topic No. 556: Alternative Minimum Tax IRS overview of the Alternative Minimum Tax, including how ISO exercises can trigger AMT liability and the rules for calculating the AMT adjustment on incentive stock options.

[6] Harry Markowitz, The Journal of Finance: Portfolio Selection (1952) The foundational paper establishing Modern Portfolio Theory (JSTOR archive of the original publication). Diversification optimizes the risk-return trade-off, and a diversified portfolio dominates a concentrated single-asset position on a risk-adjusted basis. Awarded the 1990 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.

[7] Carta: How Stock Options Are Taxed: ISO vs. NSO Tax Treatments Practitioner reference on option leverage, ISO/NSO tax differences, and frameworks for exercise timing decisions.

Elias Young 3/2/26 Elias Young 3/2/26

The True Value of Professional Investment Management: Why It's Not About Beating the Market

More Blog Articles From Eli

TL;DR

Professional investment management isn't about beating the market, it's about making better decisions consistently. Research suggests advisors may add value over time through areas such as implementation, rebalancing, behavioral coaching, tax considerations, and withdrawal planning; the magnitude and timing of any benefit varies by investor and market conditions. The biggest value? Preventing costly emotional mistakes during market extremes. Even capable DIY investors often benefit from professional guidance while freeing time for what they actually enjoy.

Interested in exploring whether professional management might add value? Let's discuss your goals, current approach, and whether we might work well together.

Note: "bps" = basis points. See explanation below.

What Actually Motivates People to Hire Advisors?

Dimensional Fund Advisors research identified four reasons families hire advisors:¹

"I need help, I don't know what I'm doing." Financial management is complex.
"I need accountability." Humans make expensive mistakes during market extremes.
"I don't want to spend time on this." Even capable people prefer allocating time elsewhere.
"I want my spouse involved in our financial decisions." Equal partnership in money matters is critical.

Notice what's missing? "I want someone who can beat the market."

"I Don't Want to Spend Time on This"

Even if you possess every skill needed to manage investments effectively, you might reasonably prefer not to. Your time and mental energy may be better spent elsewhere.

Investment management might rank between "tedious chore" and "necessary evil" on your preferred activities list. Your calendar already bursts with obligations. Or perhaps having one partner shoulder the entire investment burden creates uncomfortable dynamics.

What if you could build a relationship with a trusted financial professional and simply know it's handled competently?

While you might be capable of DIY investing, choosing not to is valid.

The Research: Quantifying Adviser's Alpha

Vanguard research suggests that following certain practices may improve investor outcomes over time, though results vary and are not consistent year to year.2 This isn't predictable annual outperformance, it's irregular value-add peaking when investors are most tempted to abandon well-designed plans.

Investment management encompasses vastly more than choosing funds. The real value lies in everything around those choices.

A Quick Note on Basis Points

"Basis points" (bps) measure small percentages:

1 basis point = 0.01%
100 basis points = 1%

So "~150 basis points" means approximately 1.5% annually. "34-70 basis points" means 0.34% to 0.70%.

Why use basis points? These small differences compound dramatically over decades. A 50 basis point (0.50%) annual advantage can mean tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars over 30 years.

The Four Pillars of Value

Dimensional organizes the value proposition into: Competence, Coaching, Convenience, and Continuity.¹

1. Competence: Technical Expertise That Matters

Cost-Effective Implementation

Average investors pay 57-79 bps annually in fund expenses. Those using low-cost funds pay just 16-20 bps. This 34-70 bps differential compounds relentlessly over decades.³

Understanding Your Portfolio Composition

Many investors contributing for years without a coherent philosophy end up with suboptimal portfolios. The most common pattern I see: significant overconcentration in the S&P 500 through multiple index funds, target-date funds that hold S&P exposure, and individual holdings that overlap with the index.

When we review these portfolios, clients often realize for the first time that they have virtually no exposure to smaller U.S. companies, international markets, or meaningful fixed income allocation. Everything is essentially the same 500 large-cap U.S. stocks, held multiple times across different accounts.

Your portfolio's composition (asset allocation and market exposure) is your returns' primary driver. It's about intentionally accessing different sources of expected return across size (large vs. small), geography (U.S. vs. international vs. emerging), and asset classes (stocks vs. bonds vs. real estate).

Heavy concentration in the S&P 500 is an implicit bet that large-cap U.S. stocks will keep outperforming everything else. That might work. Or not. But it should be conscious, not accidental.

Beyond knowing what you own, you need to know why. Your investment strategy should connect directly to actual financial goals.

We examine both sides: return drivers (asset allocation, market exposure, emphasizing higher expected return areas) and cost drags (implementation costs, taxes, expense ratios). We evaluate every holding: keep, sell, or donate, ensuring each serves a deliberate purpose aligned with your timeline and goals.

Your net returns come from assembling these components thoughtfully. Not just picking "best" funds, but how everything works together.

Converting Idle Cash Into Working Capital

Cash accumulation where it shouldn't be is widespread: substantial balances in checking/savings without purpose, RSU proceeds languishing, or money transferred to investment accounts but never deployed. We systematically review and invest these idle positions.

Disciplined Rebalancing: 14-30 Basis Points

Market movements push portfolios from target allocations. A portfolio designed with a certain stock/bond mix will naturally drift as different asset classes perform differently. Rebalancing primarily controls risk.⁴ A portfolio that's drifted to hold more stocks than intended has taken on more volatility and downside exposure than originally planned.

The challenge? Rebalancing is psychologically uncomfortable, selling winners and buying losers when instincts scream otherwise.

Calibrating Risk to Timeline

Risk is the probability of insufficient funds when needs arise. Someone purchasing a home in five years needs dramatically different allocation than someone two decades from retirement.

We construct appropriate equity/fixed income/cash combinations based on your timeline and risk tolerance. Vanguard research shows simple portfolios (like 60/40 index funds) deliver returns comparable to complex endowment portfolios.⁵ Simplicity has genuine advantages.

Tax Optimization: 0-100 Basis Points

The goal: minimize lifetime tax burden, not this year's bill. Sometimes accepting higher current taxes positions you for dramatically lower lifetime taxes.

Strategies include:⁶

Strategic asset placement (tax-efficient equities in taxable accounts, bonds in retirement accounts)
Loss harvesting during declines
Gain harvesting during low-income years
Replacing tax-inefficient funds
Donating appreciated securities versus cash

Retirement Withdrawal Strategies: 0-120 Basis Points

For retirees with multiple account types, withdrawal order significantly impacts lifetime taxes. Informed strategies add 0-153 bps annually while extending portfolio longevity.⁷

And Many More

Research suggests over 100 distinct ways advisors add value across planning domains.¹³ Effective advisors go deep on services most relevant to their clients' needs.

2. Coaching: The Behavioral Advantage (The Biggest Value-Add)

Behavioral coaching potentially adds up to 200 basis points annually, the single most valuable service advisors provide.⁸

Here's a paradox: clients don't hire advisors for emotional guidance. Yet advisors recognize this as among our most valuable contributions.

Vanguard analyzed 58,168 self-directed investors: those who made portfolio changes sacrificed 104-150 bps due to poor market timing.⁹ European analysis revealed investors consistently underperforming their own fund holdings, a persistent "behavior gap."¹⁰

The pattern: when markets surge, investors extrapolate gains indefinitely and increase risk. When markets crash, fear drives capitulation at exactly the wrong moment.

An advisor's function during these periods is rational perspective: "I understand this feels urgent. Let's review the Investment Policy Statement we created together. Do these changes align with that framework?"

Clients engage advisors not from lack of intelligence, but recognizing the value of accountability.¹¹ Advisors aren't immune to emotion, we've developed systematic processes prioritizing rational analysis over emotional reaction.

Building relationships before market extremes enables advisors to function as behavioral circuit breakers.

3. Convenience: Integrated Management and Peace of Mind

Modern financial lives are extraordinarily complex: multiple accounts, former employer plans, pensions, business interests, estate planning, tax optimization, long-term care.

Families engage advisors to spend time with family rather than managing portfolios, gain professional oversight, ensure continuity for spouses/children, and have someone seeing how all pieces fit together.

Navigating Administrative Complexity

We help navigate (often handling directly) tasks like: account establishment, automated contributions, 401(k) consolidation, Roth conversions, annual IRA contributions including backdoor Roths, investment selection in employer plans/HSAs, beneficiary updates, trust funding, among many other administrative details that would otherwise consume your time and attention.

Clear, Comprehensive Reporting

Quality reports help you understand your portfolio without needing an advanced degree.

Total-Return vs. Income-Only Strategies

With suppressed bond yields, many retirees' portfolios don't generate sufficient income. The temptation: chase yield through high-yield bonds or dividend strategies.

The problem? These typically concentrate portfolios, reduce diversification, and often expose principal to greater risk than disciplined total-return strategies.¹²

Total-return approaches (considering both income and appreciation) can provide broader diversification, potential tax efficiency advantages, and may support portfolio sustainability depending on the investor’s circumstances.

4. Continuity: Family, Legacy, and Multigenerational Planning

Professional advisors facilitate spouse involvement, children's financial education, wealth transfer, philanthropy, multigenerational planning, and legacy creation.

For many families, this broader coordination represents the deepest value.

Systematic Ongoing Reviews

Well-designed portfolios provide initial value. Ongoing oversight ensuring strategy remains appropriate, provides equal or greater value over time. Regular reviews catch drift before it becomes problematic.

The Quantified Value

Research shows:

Value varies by circumstances, but cumulative effects meaningfully improve outcomes.²

The Bottom Line

The true value isn't about "delivering" returns or picking winning stocks.

It's about making better decisions consistently, avoiding behavioral mistakes during emotional moments, creating clarity amid complexity, ensuring money serves your goals, maintaining discipline when instincts scream otherwise, and handling administrative minutiae.

Investment selection is part of professional management. But comprehensive planning, behavioral coaching, tax optimization, administrative execution, and coordinated oversight typically create the most significant impact.

The question isn't "Can I manage investments myself?"

It's: "Would I make consistently better decisions (and feel genuinely confident) with a professional partner? Would I rather spend my time and energy on things I enjoy?"

For many, research and experience strongly suggest yes. And unlike beating the market, those are areas where we aim to provide support and a disciplined process, based on each client’s circumstances.

Interested in exploring whether professional management might add value? Let's discuss your goals, current approach, and whether we might work well together.

Sources and References

¹ Lupescu, Apollo. "Communicating the Value of Your Advice." Dimensional Fund Advisors Applied Communications Workshop, November 13, 2024.

² Kinniry, Francis M. Jr., Colleen M. Jaconetti, Michael A. DiJoseph, Yan Zilbering, Donald G. Bennyhoff, and Georgina Yarwood. "Putting a Value on Your Value: Quantifying Adviser's Alpha." Vanguard Research, June 2020.

³ Ibid. Analysis based on asset-weighted expense ratios across mutual funds and ETFs available in Europe as of December 31, 2019.

⁴ Ibid. Vanguard research on portfolio rebalancing showing value-add of 26-86 basis points depending on market conditions and geography.

⁵ Based on 2019 NACUBO-Commonfund Study of Endowments, as cited in Kinniry et al., "Putting a Value on Your Value: Quantifying Adviser's Alpha."

⁶ Kinniry et al., "Putting a Value on Your Value: Quantifying Adviser's Alpha." Asset location value-add ranges from 0-110 basis points depending on jurisdiction and individual circumstances.

⁷ Harbron, Garrett L., Warwick Bloore, and Josef Zorn. "Withdrawal Order: Making the Most of Retirement Assets." Vanguard Research, 2019, as cited in Kinniry et al.

⁸ Kinniry et al., "Putting a Value on Your Value: Quantifying Adviser's Alpha." Behavioral coaching estimated at approximately 150 basis points annually.

⁹ Weber, Stephen M. "Most Vanguard IRA Investors Shot Par by Staying the Course: 2008–2012." Vanguard Research, 2013, as cited in Kinniry et al.

¹⁰ Kinniry et al., "Putting a Value on Your Value: Quantifying Adviser's Alpha." Analysis of European investor returns versus fund returns showing median negative gaps across categories.

¹¹ Bennyhoff, Donald G. "The Vanguard Adviser's Alpha Guide to Proactive Behavioural Coaching." Vanguard Research, 2018, as referenced in Dimensional Fund Advisors communications.

¹² Kinniry et al., "Putting a Value on Your Value: Quantifying Adviser's Alpha." Discussion of total-return versus income-only investing strategies for retirees.

¹³ Van Deusen, Adam. "101 Things That Advisors Actually DO To Add Value (Beyond Just Allocating A Portfolio)." Kitces.com, November 28, 2022. Available at: https://www.kitces.com/blog/advisors-add-value-proposition-financial-planning-ideal-clients-target-persona-differentiation/

¹⁴ Tharp, Derek. "Quantifying (More Accurately) The Real Impact Of A Financial Advisor's Costs On Their Clients' Nest Eggs." Kitces.com, October 23, 2024. Available at: https://www.kitces.com/blog/financial-advisor-costs-fees-aum-fee-only-high-new-worth-ramit-sethi-facet/

Elias Young 2/24/26 Elias Young 2/24/26

Financial Wellness Isn't Optional, It's Foundational

More Blog Articles From Eli

You track your steps. You hit the gym. You meal prep. You've mastered the wellness routines that optimize your physical and mental health. But there's one dimension of wellness you might be overlooking.

The Hidden Health Crisis No One Talks About

Money is the leading factor negatively affecting Americans' mental health, ahead of politics, world news, climate change, and even physical health concerns.4 Let that sink in for a moment.

The statistics paint a sobering picture:

Nearly 70% of Americans say financial uncertainty has made them feel depressed and anxious, an 8-percentage point increase from just two years ago 9
Over 50% of Americans feel stressed or anxious about their finances multiple times per week, with overall financial stress intensity rated at 3.2 out of 5 2
83% of Americans report financial stress driven by inflation, rising living costs, and recession concerns7
56% say financial stress affects their sleep, 55% their mental health, 50% their self-esteem, 44% their physical health, and 40% their relationships at home 5

Perhaps most troubling: 60% of people have avoided seeking mental health care due to financial constraints. 7 The very stress that's damaging their wellbeing prevents them from getting help.

This isn't just about feeling worried. Nearly 4 in 10 Gen Z and Millennials report feeling depressed and anxious on at least a weekly basis due to financial uncertainty. 9 Financial stress has become a chronic condition, one that compounds over time if left untreated.

Why Financial Wellness Gets Left Behind

You probably wouldn't hesitate to invest in a gym membership, therapy, or organic groceries. These feel productive, healthy, empowering (right?). But financial planning? Why does that feel overwhelming, complicated, shameful, or uncomfortable?

Here's the reality: We often learn our money mindset from our families. You likely absorbed attitudes, fears, and behaviors about money long before you understood what money actually was. Many of those patterns may not be serving you anymore, but they could still be running in the background, influencing your financial decisions. (These are sometimes called "money scripts," a whole topic we could explore another time.)

And unlike organizing your closet or meal prepping for the week, you may not see the results of financial planning immediately. There's no before-and-after photo. No dopamine hit from a perfectly labeled container.

That's probably why only 48% of Americans have emergency funds that would cover three months of expenses, even though this is considered the baseline for financial security.3 It may also explain why nearly 1 in 4 households lived paycheck to paycheck in 2025, despite total household debt reaching $18.59 trillion.6

What True Financial Wellness Actually Looks Like

Financial wellness isn't about making as much money as possible. It's about using money as a tool to make your overall life better.

It means:

Financial security - The ability to handle an emergency without panic
Strategic debt management - A manageable debt load skewed toward "good" debt like a mortgage, not high-interest credit cards crushing your monthly budget
Aligned spending - Money flowing to the right places at the right times, supporting what matters most to you
Freedom from anxiety - Confidence that you're making sound decisions, not constant worry about what you might be missing

This isn't about restriction. It's about abundance. Making conscious choices that create the life you actually want to live.

The Money Mindset Shift That Changes Everything

Most people approach budgeting as punishment. A list of things they can't have. A constant reminder of scarcity.

But here's the reframe: Your goal is to spend as much of your money as possible over the course of your life (on the things that actually matter to you).

Budgeting, saving, and investing are simply techniques to smooth out spending across earning years and non-earning years. The purpose isn't deprivation, it's ensuring your lifestyle remains at the level you want, both now and in retirement, while avoiding the trap of high-interest debt that can sabotage your financial future.

This shift from scarcity to abundance mindset transforms everything:

You're not "giving up" dining out. You're choosing to allocate those dollars toward paying down that 21% credit card balance6that's costing you thousands in interest
You're not being "deprived" of luxury purchases. You're investing in your future self's freedom—whether that's eliminating debt, taking a sabbatical, or retiring early
You're not "restricting" your spending. You're directing it toward what brings you lasting satisfaction instead of fleeting dopamine hits that often end up on high-interest credit cards

When you understand this, budgeting becomes an act of self-care, not self-denial.

Breaking the Silence: Why Talking About Money Matters

Money remains one of our last cultural taboos. We'll discuss our relationships, our therapy sessions, our trauma, but our credit card debt? Our salary? Our fear that we're falling behind? Those topics remain off-limits.

This silence keeps you stuck.

The majority of people whose mental health is negatively impacted by money cite inflation and rising prices as the culprit 4, but they're likely suffering alone, convinced everyone else has it figured out.

In relationships, financial silence is toxic. Shame over debt or unequal wealth sabotages progress toward shared goals. One partner quietly panics while the other remains oblivious. Resentment builds. Trust erodes. (An objective third party could help navigate these conversations, right?)

In friend groups, financial transparency creates both reassurance and knowledge. How did they handle that situation? What professionals helped them? What strategies actually worked? This information is invaluable, but only if people are willing to share it.

The irony? 78% of Gen Z say financial responsibility is an important attribute when choosing a significant other, and 66% don't feel pressured by friends to spend beyond their means.8 The younger generation is already normalizing these conversations. It's time the rest of us catch up.

The Six Pillars You Can't Afford to Ignore

Financial wellness isn't about mastering one thing. It's about creating a comprehensive system across six critical areas:

1. Cash Flow & Emergency Planning

Beyond just "spending less than you earn," this means understanding your patterns, optimizing your savings rate, and maintaining 3-6 months of living expenses for true emergencies. Only 20% of lower-income adults report being in excellent or good financial shape currently, 1 but this isn't about income level. It's about having a plan.

2. Strategic Debt Management

The average credit card interest rate crossed 21% in 2025, making high-interest debt incredibly expensive.6 Should you consolidate? Pay down aggressively? Use a home equity loan? The answers depend on your specific situation and goals.

3. Investment Strategy

Your portfolio should reflect your timeline, goals, and risk tolerance, not last quarter's hot stock. Are you properly diversified? Are tax implications part of your strategy? Research from major financial institutions consistently shows that diversification across asset classes reduces portfolio volatility and risk without necessarily sacrificing returns.12

4. Multi-Year Tax Planning

This isn't about filing your return. It's about maximizing tax-advantaged accounts, planning for retirement distributions, and, if you're a business owner, structuring your affairs for maximum efficiency. While the tax code is complex, strategic planning could help optimize your tax situation.

5. Comprehensive Risk Management

Health insurance, life insurance, disability coverage, umbrella policies, and long-term care: each serves a different purpose. 27% of adults had trouble paying for medical care in the past year.3 The right insurance protects you from catastrophic financial loss.

6. Estate Planning

Who cares for your children if something happens to you? Who makes healthcare decisions? How do your assets transfer, and what are the tax implications? These aren't comfortable conversations, but they're essential ones.

Why Going It Alone Isn't Working

You likely know much of this intellectually. You probably understand you should have a budget, pay down debt, invest for retirement, get proper insurance, and create an estate plan.

But here's what the research shows about people who try to do it themselves:

They make expensive mistakes. Behavioral mistakes may reduce wealth significantly.15 Common errors include market timing, panic selling during downturns, chasing performance, and failing to rebalance portfolios systematically.

They let emotions drive decisions. Behavioral mistakes may reduce wealth significantly.15 When markets drop, panic sets in. When they soar, greed takes over. Both can undermine long-term returns.

They don't know what they don't know. Tax strategies, estate planning nuances, insurance gaps, investment allocation. These are complex domains where missteps can have long-term consequences.

They run out of time and energy. U.S. employees 56% spend 3 or more work hours per week dealing with personal financial issues.5

The Measurable Value of Professional Guidance

The financial advice industry has been rigorously studied. The data is clear and consistent:

Leading research from Vanguard, Morningstar, and Russell Investments has examined the potential value professional advisors may add through their "Advisor's Alpha" and "Gamma" frameworks.10,17,13These studies explore how tax optimization, behavioral coaching, strategic asset location, disciplined rebalancing, and comprehensive planning could contribute meaningful value over time by supporting better decision-making and helping clients avoid costly mistakes.

Beyond portfolio optimization:

94% of households advised by CFP® professionals feel confident in their ability to achieve their financial goals, compared to 85% of those working with other advisors and 81% of unadvised Americans.11

CFP® professional clients are significantly more prepared: 83% maintain emergency funds covering three months of expenses (versus 68% with other advisors and 53% unadvised), and 61% have a will in place (versus 46% with other advisors and 24% unadvised).11

Half (51%) of people who work with a CFP® professional report living comfortably, compared to 40% with other advisors and 31% of unadvised households.11

Advised investors report greater peace of mind related to their finances: 86% feel more peace of mind, with 60% experiencing less anxiety, worry, sadness, and disappointment, and instead feeling more confident, satisfied, secure, and proud.16

Working with an advisor may also save time: 76% report time savings, with a median of two hours per week (over 100 hours annually) that can be redirected toward activities like leisure, time with family, and exercise.16

The Emotional ROI You Can't Ignore

Over half of consumers who work with CFP® professionals report that financial advice positively impacted their mental health and family life.11 Given the financial stress we discussed earlier, consider what addressing it might mean: the potential for better sleep, less anxiety, improved relationships, greater confidence, and more time with your family.

Research also shows that clients of CFP® professionals report higher quality of life scores compared to those who work with other financial planning professionals or manage finances independently.11 Investors with human advisors perceive meaningful progress toward their financial goals compared to managing finances on their own.14

This isn't just about money. It's about reclaiming your mental bandwidth, your emotional energy, and your time.

Can you quantify peace of mind? Can you put a price on knowing you've made sound decisions that keep your goals on track? Can you measure the value of not lying awake at 3 AM worrying about money?

The Real Cost of Waiting

Each month without a comprehensive financial plan may mean:

Potential compounding interest not captured
Tax savings that may be missed
Possible insurance gaps that could leave you exposed
Ongoing emotional stress that may affect your health and relationships
Time spent worrying that could be redirected toward living your life

Near the end of 2024, only 73% of adults reported doing okay financially or living comfortably, down from 78% in 2021.1 The trend suggests challenges for many Americans.

Meanwhile, 28% of adults expect their financial situation to be worse a year from now, up significantly from 16% who said this in 2024.3

The environment presents ongoing challenges: inflation, rising costs, economic uncertainty. The question is whether you'll face them with a plan or without one.

What Makes Financial Wellness Different From Every Other Form of Organization

When you organize your closet, you feel satisfied for a few weeks. Then life happens, and you're back to chaos.

When you establish financial wellness with a competent advisor, you create a system that:

Compounds over time with ongoing adjustments rather than constant upkeep
Adapts to your life instead of becoming obsolete
Streamlines future decisions rather than adding complexity
Builds on itself instead of needing to start from scratch

A good financial advisor should quarterback your entire financial life, not just help you create a budget. This means coordinating your investments, taxes, insurance, and estate plan. Working with your CPA and attorney to ensure nothing falls through the cracks. Monitoring and adjusting as markets change, laws change, and your life changes.

If your current advisor isn't providing this level of comprehensive guidance, it may be worth considering whether you're getting the value you deserve.

Most importantly, the right advisor should transform financial planning from a source of anxiety into a source of confidence.

From Overwhelmed to In Control: What Working Together Looks Like

If you're thinking, "I need to do something about this," here's what taking action actually involves:

Step 1: An Honest Conversation
No judgment, no sales pressure. Just a candid discussion about where you are, where you want to be, and what's standing in your way. Many people find this conversation provides helpful clarity as a starting point.

Step 2: Comprehensive Assessment
We examine all six pillars of financial wellness together. Where are the opportunities? Where are the vulnerabilities? What's working, and what's quietly undermining your goals?

Step 3: Your Customized Plan
Not a template. Not generic advice. A written financial plan that addresses your specific circumstances, values, and goals, with clear action steps and realistic timelines.

Step 4: Implementation & Ongoing Partnership
You don't get a binder to put on a shelf. Your advisor helps you execute the plan, automate what can be automated, and adapt as your life evolves (by the way, this is how I work with clients). Regular check-ins ensure you stay on track and adjust course when needed.

This is what financial wellness actually looks like: not perfect budgets that fail after two weeks, but sustainable systems that support the life you want to live.

The Bottom Line: Financial Wellness Is Wellness

You can't exercise your way out of financial stress. You can't hydrate your way to retirement security. You can't sleep your way to financial freedom (especially if you're stressed about your finances 5). And ignoring it won't make it disappear.

Physical health, mental health, and financial health are interconnected. 73% of clients who work with CFP® professionals generally feel they can cope well with any health issues compared to 64% of unadvised consumers.11 Financial wellness doesn't just reduce money stress: it makes you more resilient across all areas of life.

The cultural narrative tells you that needing help with money is a sign of failure. That's backwards.

You wouldn't think twice about hiring a trainer to optimize your physical health or a therapist to support your mental health. Your financial health deserves the same level of professional attention, especially since it impacts other dimensions of your wellbeing.

Your Next Step

Financial wellness isn't about having definitive answers. It's about asking the right questions and working with someone who can help you find answers that fit your life.

The choice isn't between managing everything yourself or delegating everything to someone else. It's between struggling alone with uncertainty or partnering with a professional who can provide clarity, strategy, and peace of mind.

Ready to make financial wellness part of your overall wellbeing?

Schedule your complimentary financial wellness consultation (below)

Let's transform financial stress into financial confidence, together.

Sources and References

Federal Reserve. (2025). Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households in 2024. https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/2025-economic-well-being-of-us-households-in-2024-overall-financial-well-being.htm
Motley Fool Money. (2024). Financial Stress, Anxiety, and Mental Health Survey. https://www.fool.com/money/research/financial-stress-anxiety-and-mental-health-survey/
Pew Research Center. (2025). More Americans now say personal finances will be worse a year from now. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/05/07/growing-share-of-us-adults-say-their-personal-finances-will-be-worse-a-year-from-now/
Bankrate. (2025). Money and Mental Health Survey. https://www.bankrate.com/banking/money-and-mental-health-survey/
PwC. (2023). Employee Financial Wellness Survey. https://www.pwc.com/us/en/services/consulting/business-transformation/library/employee-financial-wellness-survey.html
CoinLaw. (2025). Household Financial Stress Statistics 2025. https://coinlaw.io/household-financial-stress-statistics/
LifeStance Health. (2025). 2025 Study: How Financial Stress ("Stressflation") Impacts Americans' Mental Health. https://lifestance.com/insight/financial-stress-impact-mental-health-statistics-2025/
Bank of America. (2025). Better Money Habits Financial Education Study. https://newsroom.bankofamerica.com/content/newsroom/press-releases/2025/07/confronted-with-higher-living-costs--72--of-young-adults-take-ac.html
Northwestern Mutual. (2025). Planning & Progress Study. https://news.northwesternmutual.com/2025-06-03-Nearly-70-of-Americans-Say-Financial-Uncertainty-Has-Made-Them-Feel-Depressed-and-Anxious,-According-to-Northwestern-Mutual-2025-Planning-Progress-Study
Vanguard. Putting a Value on Your Value: Quantifying Vanguard Advisor's Alpha. https://advisors.vanguard.com/advisors-alpha
CFP Board. (2026). Trust. Confidence. Impact: 2025 Financial Planning Longitudinal Study. https://www.cfp.net/news/2026/01/cfp-professional-advised-americans-experience-greater-financial-preparedness
Vanguard. Framework for Constructing Globally Diversified Portfolios. https://investor.vanguard.com/investor-resources-education/portfolio-management/diversifying-your-portfolio
Russell Investments. Value of an Advisor Study. Referenced in multiple industry analyses of advisor value-add through holistic financial planning.
Vanguard. Why Clients Prefer Financial Advisors Over Robo Advisors. https://advisors.vanguard.com/advisors-alpha/advice-that-clients-value
Covenant Wealth Advisors. (2025). The True Value of a Financial Advisor: What You Need to Know. https://www.covenantwealthadvisors.com/post/value-of-a-financial-advisor-what-you-need-to-know
Vanguard. (2025). Advice Pays in Peace of Mind and Time. https://corporate.vanguard.com/content/corporatesite/us/en/corp/who-we-are/pressroom/press-release-advice-pays-in-peace-of-mind-and-time-vanguard-survey-reveals-hidden-value-of-financial-advice-07072025.html
Blanchett, D. and Kaplan, P. (2013). Alpha, Beta, and Now...Gamma. Morningstar. https://www.morningstar.com/financial-advisors/gamma-action

Elias Young 2/23/26 Elias Young 2/23/26

The Smart Money Moves You're Probably Not Making: Roth Strategies

More Blog Articles From Eli

Roth Conversions

The first strategy I’m going to talk about is called a Roth conversion, and here's the simple version: you move money from your traditional retirement account (where you'll pay taxes later) into a Roth account (where qualified withdrawals may be tax-free). Yes, you pay taxes now when you convert, but you may pay less overall depending on your tax rates, timing, and other factors.

The idea is simple: pay taxes when your rate is low, not when it's high. The catch? You can't perfectly predict your future tax rate. (This is one area where doing a financial plan can shine).

The Basics: Two Types of Retirement Accounts

Traditional 401(k)/IRA: You get a tax break now, pay taxes later when you withdraw in retirement.

Roth 401(k)/IRA: No tax break now, but your money grows tax-free forever. Qualified withdrawals are generally tax-free (withdrawals on growth before you are 59½ are not tax-free).

Roth conversion: Moving money from traditional → Roth. You pay taxes on the amount you convert this year, but then it's tax-free as it grows in the Roth account.1

When NOT to Convert

Skip Roth conversions if:

You'll be in a lower tax bracket later. If retirement income will be much lower than now, wait and pay less tax later.
You need the money within 5 years. There's a 5-year waiting period to avoid penalties on the converted funds.5
You don't have cash to pay taxes. Don't use the retirement money itself to pay the increased tax bill; in part, this defeats the purpose (especially for those under 59½, where the tax withholding will be penalized as an early distribution).
Your health insurance costs are affected more than the tax benefit of the conversion. Conversions count as income and can reduce ACA subsidies, and may push you into a higher IRMAA bracket if you are on Medicare.6

Quick Action Steps

Check your current tax bracket. Will it be higher or lower in retirement?
Determine how much. You don't have to convert everything, and should base the amount you convert on your tax estimates.
Time it right. Many people wait until Q4 to see their full-year income before converting.
Remember: no take-backs. You can't reverse a Roth conversion after 2018 tax law changes.10 Make sure you're confident before doing it.

You can convert a little each year or a lot—whatever makes sense for your situation.2

There’s More: Mega Backdoor Roth

The second Roth strategy applies if you max out your 401(k) and want to save even more tax-free. The mega backdoor Roth lets you contribute up to $47,500 extra (in 2026) to a Roth account.11,12

How it works:

Regular 401(k) limit (ignoring the additional ‘catch-up’ for those 50+): $24,500
Total contribution limit (including employer match): $72,000
The gap between these? You can fill it with "after-tax contributions"
Then immediately convert those to Roth

Requirements:

Your employer's 401(k) must allow after-tax contributions
Your plan must allow in-service conversions or withdrawals13,14
Common at big companies

Example: You contribute $24,500, your employer adds $4,500 match. That's $29,000 total. You can add another $43,000 as after-tax contributions and convert to Roth, giving you nearly $72,000 in retirement savings for the year.

Tax tip: Convert the after-tax contributions frequently to avoid taxes on earnings. Many plans do this automatically.15

Check with your HR department to see if your plan offers this option.

Benefits of Roth Accounts

Beyond saving on taxes, Roth accounts give you:

No forced withdrawals. Traditional IRAs have ‘Required Minimum Distributions’ (RMDs) which require you to start taking money out once you reach the required age.3 Roth accounts don't.
Flexible retirement planning. Roth withdrawals don't count as taxable income, so they won't increase your Medicare costs or affect Social Security taxes.4
Better for heirs. Your beneficiaries inherit Roth accounts tax-free.

Bottom Line

Using Roth accounts effectively may save you thousands in taxes over your lifetime, but the key is timing.

Best candidates for Roth Strategies:

Between jobs or careers
Early retirees (ideally before Social Security & RMDs)
Anyone in an unusually low tax year
High earners who can do a mega backdoor Roth

Now that you know these options exist, pay attention to your income each year. When you spot a low-income window, you may have an opportunity to convert at a lower rate if it aligns with your tax and planning considerations.

Next step: Talk to a financial planner with experience with software to see if a conversion makes sense for your situation this year, or in the near future.

This article is for educational purposes only and should not be considered tax or financial advice. Individual circumstances vary, and you should consult with a qualified financial planner or tax professional before making decisions about Roth conversions.

Sources and References

Internal Revenue Service. "Publication 590-B (2026), Distributions from Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs)." https://www.irs.gov/publications/p590b
Vanguard. "Is a Roth IRA conversion right for you?" Vanguard Investor Resources & Education. https://investor.vanguard.com/investor-resources-education/iras/ira-roth-conversion
Internal Revenue Service. "Retirement topics - Required minimum distributions (RMDs)." Updated January 29, 2026. https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/plan-participant-employee/retirement-topics-required-minimum-distributions-rmds
Charles Schwab. "Required Minimum Distributions: What's New in 2026." https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/required-minimum-distributions-what-you-should-know
Lord Abbett. "Quick Answers: The Five-Year Rule and Important Info on Roth IRA Conversions." August 7, 2024. https://www.lordabbett.com/en-us/financial-advisor/insights/retirement-planning/quick-answers-the-five-year-rule-and-important-info-on-roth-ira-.html
Vision Retirement. "Roth IRA Conversions: Rules, Restrictions, and Taxes." January 2026. https://www.visionretirement.com/articles/investing/basics-of-roth-ira-conversions
Fidelity. "Qualified Charitable Distributions (QCDs)." https://www.fidelity.com/retirement-ira/required-minimum-distributions-qcds
Internal Revenue Service. "IRS releases tax inflation adjustments for tax year 2026, including amendments from the One, Big, Beautiful Bill." October 9, 2025. https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/irs-releases-tax-inflation-adjustments-for-tax-year-2026-including-amendments-from-the-one-big-beautiful-bill
Tax Foundation. "2026 Tax Brackets and Federal Income Tax Rates." February 11, 2026. https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/2026-tax-brackets/
Internal Revenue Service. "Publication 590-B (2026), Distributions from Individual Retirement Arrangements (IRAs)." https://www.irs.gov/publications/p590b
Internal Revenue Service. "Retirement topics - 401(k) and profit-sharing plan contribution limits." Updated January 2026. https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/plan-participant-employee/retirement-topics-401k-and-profit-sharing-plan-contribution-limits
Empower. "Mega Backdoor Roth: How It Works and Its Benefits." 2026. https://www.empower.com/the-currency/money/mega-backdoor-roth
Fidelity. "What is a mega backdoor Roth?" February 28, 2025. https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/personal-finance/mega-backdoor-roth
NerdWallet. "Mega Backdoor Roths: How They Work, Limits." Updated February 2, 2026. https://www.nerdwallet.com/retirement/learn/mega-backdoor-roths-work
Internal Revenue Service. "Rollovers of after-tax contributions in retirement plans." https://www.irs.gov/retirement-plans/rollovers-of-after-tax-contributions-in-retirement-plans

Elias Young 2/17/26 Elias Young 2/17/26

Are Your Portfolio and Retirement Plan Up To Date?

More Blog Articles From Eli

Markets have delivered strong gains in recent years. A strong equity run may have boosted your portfolio but it may also have increased your overall risk exposure. Interest rates remain elevated compared to the pre-2022 era, but have been on the decline since the last peak (shown in the FRED graphic below)¹.

As we move into 2026, it’s worth reviewing both your investment strategy and your retirement savings plan to ensure they remain aligned with your long-term goals.

Revisit Your Diversification

Consider the following:

Are you diversified across sectors and industries?
Do you include international exposure?
What is your balance among large-, mid-, and small-cap stocks?
What is your philosophy when it comes to growth and value stocks?
Has market performance caused your allocation to drift beyond your intended targets?

If equities now represent a larger share of your portfolio than planned, rebalancing may help realign risk.

Rebalancing and Tax Implications

Rebalancing restores your target allocation and can help manage portfolio risk. While doing so, consider tax efficiency:

Capital losses offset capital gains.²
Up to $3,000 in excess net losses may offset ordinary income annually.²
Selecting higher cost-basis shares when selling can improve after-tax outcomes. At the same time, you will need to pay attention to short-term vs. long-term capital gains.

If you have accounts with different tax types, you may also consider implementing an ‘asset location’ strategy.

The Role of Cash

Cash serves as a stability buffer, not a growth engine. Maintaining three to six months of living expenses in liquid savings can provide flexibility and a liquidity buffer for unexpected events.³

At the same time, holding excessive cash may hinder long-term growth. Ensuring your emergency funds are earning competitive yields while remaining accessible can improve overall efficiency.

If you have more cash than what’s needed for your emergency fund, you don’t have to get it invested all at once. Dollar-cost averaging, investing gradually over time, can reduce the risk of poor timing decisions during volatile periods.

Retirement Savings: 2026 Contribution Limits

The IRS has increased retirement plan contribution limits for 2026.⁴

2026 Limits

401(k), 403(b), 457(b), TSP: $24,500⁴
Catch-up (age 50+): $8,000⁴
Enhanced catch-up (ages 60–63): $11,250⁵
IRA contribution limit: $7,500⁴
IRA catch-up (age 50+): $1,100⁴

Individuals age 50 or older may contribute up to $32,500 to a 401(k), while those ages 60–63 may contribute up to $35,750, before employer matching.

Additionally, under SECURE Act 2.0, certain higher-income earners are required to make catch-up contributions on a Roth (after-tax) basis beginning in 2026.⁵

If your income has increased, consider raising your contribution percentage. Incremental increases can have a significant long-term impact due to compounding.

Saving by Career Stage

Early Career:
Start early and contribute at least enough to receive your employer match. With decades ahead, a higher equity allocation may be appropriate depending on risk tolerance.

Mid-Career:
Maximize tax-advantaged contributions as income grows to enhance tax efficiency and accelerate savings. Monitor employer stock exposure to avoid concentration risk.

Approaching Retirement:
Take full advantage of catch-up provisions. Gradually adjusting risk exposure may make sense, but maintaining some growth allocation remains important for long retirements.

The Big Picture

Preparing for 2026 isn’t about predicting markets. It’s about maintaining discipline:

Diversify thoughtfully.
Rebalance regularly.
Use tax-efficient strategies.
Maximize retirement contributions.
Adjust your plan as your goals change.

Strong markets can build wealth. Consistent, informed planning helps preserve it.

Notes

Taken from https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS#, using a date range from January 1st 2010 thru January 1st 2026
Internal Revenue Service. Topic No. 409 Capital Gains and Losses. IRS, 2024.
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Emergency Savings and Financial Stability. CFPB, 2023.
Internal Revenue Service. “401(k) Limit Increases to $24,500 for 2026; IRA Limit Increases to $7,500.” IRS Newsroom, 2025.
U.S. Congress. SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022, Pub. L. No. 117-328, 2022.

Elias Young 2/2/26 Elias Young 2/2/26

Market Commentary: Q1 2026 Looking At 2025

2026 Q1 Market Commentary

More Blog Articles From Eli

From Shutdown to New Year: Staying Focused in a Changing Market

In the final months of the year A prolonged government shutdown delayed key data, interest rate expectations evolved, and global events added to the news flow. Even so, markets continued to function, and long-term investors were once again reminded of the value of staying the course rather than focusing on headlines.

As we move from the fourth quarter into the start of 2026, the environment highlights an important truth: markets adapt, and a disciplined, diversified approach remains a reliable investment approach.

Limited Data, But a Functioning Economy

The government shutdown temporarily paused many official economic reports. As a result, some data for September, October, and November arrived at different times than normally expected. In the meantime, private-sector sources such as ADP provided alternative insights into employment trends.

According to the ADP National Employment Report, U.S. private-sector employment declined by 32,000 jobs in November 2025, with most losses coming from businesses with fewer than 50 employees.¹ While notable, this represents a single data point within an economy that continues to adjust.

Interest Rates and the Federal Reserve

The Federal Reserve continued to move cautiously. In late October, it lowered its key interest rate to a range of 3.75%–4%. Then A further 0.25% cut followed in December, which markets had largely anticipated.

Importantly, the Fed signaled that it is not in a hurry to cut rates further. Inflation has eased, and the labor market, while slower, continues to grow. This deliberate approach reflects an effort to balance economic support with long-term stability.

Looking ahead, interest rate decisions in 2026 remain uncertain, particularly as Federal Reserve leadership changes later in the year, along with mounting pressure from the current administration to cut rates. For long-term investors, this reinforces the importance of building portfolios that are not dependent on predicting short-term policy decisions.

Productivity: A Positive Trend

One encouraging development has been stronger productivity. In the third quarter of 2025, U.S. worker productivity rose 4.9%, driven by higher output without a corresponding increase in hours worked.²

These gains likely reflect a combination of factors, including technology adoption, automation investments made in recent years, and possibly workers staying in their roles longer. While productivity data can fluctuate quarter to quarter, this trend is constructive for long-term economic health.

Markets and Volatility

U.S. stock markets delivered solid returns over the year, even though the path was uneven. Volatility was higher at times, particularly earlier in the year, as investors reacted to trade policy changes and other uncertainties around tariffs. When viewed over the full year, however, market performance appeared far less dramatic than daily headlines suggested.

This serves as a reminder that short-term market swings often feel more stressful in real time than they appear in hindsight — and that long-term investors are generally better served by staying invested rather than reacting to market swings.

A Global Perspective: Diversification at Work

One of the most interesting stories of the year came from outside the U.S. In contrast to recent years, international stocks outperformed U.S. stocks. Developed international markets rose 31.9%, emerging markets gained 33.6%, and global stocks increased 22.3% for the year.³

These results highlight the benefits of global diversification. Market leadership shifts over time, often unexpectedly. In 2025, investors with exposure beyond the U.S. experienced higher returns in certain international markets than investors concentrated solely in the U.S.

Performance also varied by investment style. Value stocks performed well outside the U.S., while growth stocks continued to lead in the U.S. Large-company stocks outperformed smaller companies overall, though international small-cap value stocks were among the strongest performers. Over longer periods, U.S. small-cap value has also delivered competitive returns, even during extended periods of large-cap dominance.

The takeaway is not to chase what performed best this year, but to maintain broad diversification across regions, company sizes, and investment styles.

Bonds and Other Assets

Bonds played an important role in 2025. U.S. Treasury bonds returned 6.3%, and the broader U.S. bond market posted its best annual gain since 2020. Global bonds also delivered positive returns.⁴ For diversified portfolios, bonds provided income for some investors and, in some periods, helped moderate portfolio volatility, though bond prices and yields can fluctuate.

Gold also attracted attention as prices rose sharply during the year. While some investors tout gold as a hedge, history shows that its price movements have often been volatile and have not consistently tracked inflation or economic growth.⁵ As with any asset, its usefulness depends on how it fits within a broader, diversified portfolio rather than on short-term price movements.

The Long-Term Investor’s Checklist

Lets revisit the basics:

Are your goals still clear or have they changed?
Is your portfolio aligned with your comfort level for risk, and in alignment with your goals?
Does your financial plan help you stay disciplined during market ups and downs?

A sound financial plan is built around long-term goals. It evolves as life changes, but it does not require constant adjustments in response to headlines.

There were also practical planning opportunities. Investors aged 60 to 63 were eligible for enhanced “super catch-up” retirement contributions, allowing higher savings before new rules take effect in 2026. Year-end tax planning — including charitable giving and tax-loss harvesting — also offered ways to support long-term outcomes. A new Senior deduction for those age 65+ may also offer additional planning opportunities thru 2028.

Looking Ahead

As the new year begins, uncertainty remains — as it always does. Interest rates may continue to shift, markets will rotate, and headlines will come and go. None of this changes the core principles of successful long-term investing.

Over time, diversification, cost awareness, and patience may help support long-term investing goals, though outcomes vary and losses are possible. Rather than trying to predict what comes next, focusing on factors within your control—allocation, savings, and discipline—can be constructive.

2025 Market Returns

Equities

The Dow Jones Industrial Average 14.92%

S&P 500 Index (US Large Caps) 17.88%

Russell 2000 Index (US Small Caps) 12.81%

MSCI All Country World ex USA IMI Index (net div.) (International) 31.96%

MSCI Emerging Markets Index (net div.) 33.57%

Dow Jones Global Select REIT Index 8.59%

Fixed Income

Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index 7.30%

Bloomberg Municipal Bond Index 4.25%

3 Month US Treasury Bill 4.40%

Bloomberg U.S. Treasury Bond Index 7-10 Years 8.40%

Footnotes

¹ According to the ADP National Employment Report, U.S. private-sector employment declined by 32,000 jobs in November 2025, with job losses concentrated among businesses with fewer than 50 employees.

² The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that nonfarm business sector labor productivity increased 4.9% in the third quarter of 2025, with output rising 5.4% while hours worked increased 0.5% on an annualized basis.

³ International equity performance data is based on MSCI indices. In 2025, the MSCI World ex USA Index gained 31.9%, the MSCI Emerging Markets Index rose 33.6%, and the MSCI All Country World Index increased 22.3%. MSCI indices are not available for direct investment.

⁴ Bond market returns reflect widely used benchmarks. In 2025, U.S. Treasuries returned 6.3%, the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index rose 7.3%, and the Bloomberg Global Aggregate Bond Index (hedged to U.S. dollars) gained 4.9%. Data sourced from the U.S. Department of the Treasury and Bloomberg Finance LP.

⁵ Gold prices rose above $4,000 per ounce in 2025. Historical analysis shows that gold prices have experienced significant volatility and have shown limited long-term correlation with inflation or U.S. economic growth.