Finance

All travel finance news

Why Standard Lithium Stock Soared 25% Today to a 52-Week High

The lithium miner is closer to producing its first battery-grade lithium.

Shares of Standard Lithium (SLI 12.79%) jumped sharply today, surging 25% in early-morning trading and still holding up about 15% through 11:30 a.m. ET Thursday. And, it isn’t about tariffs or trade wars or even lithium prices today.

Standard Lithium is yet to start commercial production, but it has just hit a major milestone that moves it closer to the goal.

Lithium-ion batteries.

Image source: Getty Images.

Standard Lithium inches closer to first production

Standard Lithium is still in the pre-production stage. Its flagship projects are located in the lithium-brine-rich resource, the Smackover Formation, which extends from central Texas to the Florida panhandle. Standard Lithium is focused on projects in South-West Arkansas (SWA) and East Texas within the Smackover Formation.

While the company is still exploring East Texas and has only filed an initial resource estimate for the deposit, the SWA project is in the advanced stages now.

Standard Lithium is jointly developing SWA with Equinor (EQNR -0.61%), with Standard Lithium owning a 55% stake. On Oct. 14, it filed a definitive feasibility study (DFS) for the project, outlining an annual production capacity of 22,500 tonnes of battery-grade lithium carbonate over a 20-year lifespan.

A DFS is the cornerstone for a mine, as it confirms its commercial viability.

In other words, it is now proven that Standard Lithium can economically mine lithium from SWA and, therefore, move on to the nest stage of raising funds to start the production process. So it’s a major milestone for the company and explains why the lithium stock is flying higher.

Time to buy Standard Lithium stock hand over fist?

Though the DFS sets the stage for commercial extraction of lithium from SWA, it’s still a time-consuming process.

Standard Lithium is estimating a 34-month timeline, from construction to the start of commercial operations. So if construction begins in early 2026, the earliest expected date for first commercial production is around the end of 2028, provided Standard Lithium can secure capital, finalize the technical plans, and start and complete construction at the project on time.

Keep in mind that Standard Lithium stock has already doubled within just one month and has surged over 300% so far in 2025, as of this writing. However, that rally was largely fueled by speculation of a possible U.S. government stake.

Source link

How Investing Just $10 a Day Could Make You a Millionaire by Retirement

Becoming a retirement millionaire is more attainable than it might seem.

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

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

Building long-term wealth in the stock market

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

Two adults and a child looking at a tablet and smiling.

Image source: Getty Images.

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

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

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

Turning $10 per day into $1 million or more

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

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

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

Number of Years Total Savings
20 $206,000
25 $354,000
30 $592,000
35 $976,000
40 $1,593,000

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

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

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

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

Source link

Travelers (TRV) Q3 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

Date

Thursday, Oct. 16, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. ET

Call participants

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer — Alan Schnitzer

Chief Financial Officer — Dan Frey

President, Business Insurance — Greg Toczydlowski

President, Bond & Specialty Insurance — Jeffrey Klenk

President, Personal Insurance — Michael Klein

Senior Vice President, Investor Relations — Abbe Goldstein

Need a quote from a Motley Fool analyst? Email [email protected]

Takeaways

Core Income — $1.9 billion in core income, or $8.14 per diluted share, driven by underwriting gains and increased investment income.

Return on Equity — Core return on equity was 22.6% for the quarter; trailing twelve-month core return on equity at 18.7%.

Underwriting Income — $1.4 billion pretax, doubling compared to the prior-year quarter, aided by reduced catastrophe losses and a 1.7-point improvement in the underlying combined ratio to 83.9%.

Net Investment Income (After Tax) — $850 million, a 15% year-over-year increase, driven by fixed income portfolio growth and higher yields.

Net Written Premiums — $11.5 billion in net written premiums, with Business Insurance at $5.7 billion (up 3%), Bond & Specialty at $1.1 billion, and Personal Insurance at $4.7 billion.

Segment Combined Ratios — Business Insurance: 92.9% (88.3% underlying); Bond & Specialty: 81.6% (85.8% underlying); Personal Insurance: 81.3% (77.7% underlying).

Shareholder Capital Return — $878 million returned, with $628 million in share repurchases and $250 million in dividends.

Adjusted Book Value Per Share — Adjusted book value per share was $150.55 at quarter end, up 15% from a year earlier.

Expense Ratio — 28.6% (year-to-date 28.5%), with management maintaining a 28% target for both 2025 and 2026.

Catastrophe Losses — $42 million pretax, described as “benign,” driven largely by tornado and hail events in the Central U.S.

Net Favorable Prior Year Reserve Development (PYD) — $22 million pretax (includes $277 million asbestos charge in Business Insurance, offset by favorable PYD in other lines).

Operating Cash Flow — Record $4.2 billion, with holding company liquidity of $2.8 billion at quarter end.

Share Repurchase Outlook — Management expects Q4 repurchases to reach about $1.3 billion, with a total of approximately $3.5 billion projected over Q3 2025 through Q1 2026, equating to a 5% reduction in share count.

Business Insurance Pricing Metrics — Renewal premium change (RPC) of 7.1% segment-wide, increasing to 9% ex-property; renewal rate change of 6.7%; retention at 85%.

Bond & Specialty Insurance — Segment retention of 87% in management liability, renewal premium change of 3.7% in domestic management liability, and a 40% increase in new lines of business sold to existing customers (private and nonprofit).

Personal Insurance Homeowners Metrics — Renewal premium change at 18%, expected to decrease to single digits in early 2026 as insured values align with replacement costs; retention at 84%.

Personal Insurance Auto Metrics — Combined ratio of 84.9%, underlying combined ratio of 88.3%, auto new business premium up year-over-year for the fourth consecutive quarter; retention at 82%.

Investment Portfolio Update — Portfolio grew by approximately $4 billion; more than 90% in fixed income with an average credit rating of AA; net unrealized investment loss narrowed from $3 billion to $2 billion after tax.

Debt Issuance — $1.25 billion issued (split between $500 million ten-year and $750 million thirty-year notes) for ordinary capital management.

Technology Investment — $13 billion invested since 2016 in technology, enabling a 300-basis-point reduction in expense ratio and access to over 65 billion clean data points to power AI and analytics initiatives, as disclosed by management.

Summary

Travelers (TRV -3.30%) reported substantial earnings growth, citing record profitability driven by improved underwriting and investment performance. Management highlighted excess capital and liquidity, with plans to accelerate share repurchases through Q1 2026 and indicated additional buybacks linked to the Canadian operations sale, specifically referencing a three-quarter period. The call outlined targeted underwriting strategies, with disciplined risk selection in property and actions to optimize exposure in high-catastrophe geographies. The company emphasized advancements in technology and AI, quantifying its scale, data advantage, and focus on sustainable cost improvements and operating leverage. Leadership reaffirmed a measured approach to capital deployment, prioritizing technology and potential M&A before returning excess to shareholders.

Chairman Schnitzer said, “we anticipate a higher level of share repurchase over the next couple of quarters,” underscoring shareholder return as a key use of surplus capital.

CFO Frey stated, “Our outlook for fixed income NII, including earnings from short-term securities, has increased from the outlook we provided a quarter ago,” signaling rising yield expectations for the investment portfolio.

President Klein provided forward guidance: We expect RPC to remain elevated and then drop into single digits beginning in early 2026.

President Toczydlowski disclosed middle market new business of $391 million—its highest third-quarter result—up 7% from the prior year, despite selective property underwriting and competitive market dynamics.

Industry glossary

Renewal Premium Change (RPC): The percentage change in premium for renewed policies, reflecting both pricing actions and changes in exposure or insured value.

Combined Ratio: A measure of underwriting profitability, calculated by summing incurred losses and expenses as a percentage of earned premiums; a ratio below 100% indicates underwriting profit.

PYC/PYD (Prior Year Reserve Development): The adjustment (favorable or unfavorable) to reserves set aside in prior periods for claims, as new information becomes available.

Retention: The proportion of policies or premium renewed with the company, stated as a percentage.

Middle Market: The business segment serving mid-sized commercial insurance customers, distinct from small businesses (“Select”) and large national accounts.

Travis: Travelers’ proprietary digital experience platform for distribution partners.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Alan Schnitzer chairman and CEO Dan Frey CFO and our three segment presidents. Greg Toczydlowski of Business Insurance, Jeff Klenk of Bond and Specialty Insurance, and Michael Klein of Personal Insurance. They will discuss the financial results of our business and the current market environment. They will refer to the webcast presentation as they go through prepared remarks, and then we will take questions before I turn the call over to Alan, I’d like to draw your attention to the explanatory note included at the end of the webcast presentation. Our presentation today includes forward looking statements. The company cautions investors that any forward looking statement involves risks and uncertainties and is not a guarantee of future performance.

Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors. These factors are described under forward-looking statements in our earnings press release and in our most recent 10-Q and 10-Ks filed with the SEC. We do not undertake any obligation to update forward-looking statements. Also, in our remarks or responses to questions, we may mention some non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations are included in our recent earnings press release, financial supplement, and other materials available in the Investors section on our website. And now I’d like to turn the call over to Alan Schnitzer.

Alan Schnitzer: Thank you, Abby. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. We are pleased to report excellent third-quarter results. We earned core income of $1.9 billion or $8.14 per diluted share. Our return on equity for the quarter was 22.6%, bringing our core return on equity for the trailing twelve months to 18.7%. Very strong underwriting results and higher investment income drove the bottom line. Underwriting income of $1.4 billion pretax more than doubled compared to the prior year quarter, benefiting from both the lower level of catastrophe losses and higher underlying underwriting income. The underlying result was driven by higher net earned premiums and an underlying combined ratio that improved 1.7 points to an exceptional 83.9%.

Underwriting income was higher in all three segments. Our high-quality investment portfolio also continued to perform well, generating after-tax net investment income of $850 million for the quarter, up 15%, driven by strong and reliable returns from our growing fixed income portfolio. Our underwriting and investment results, together with our strong balance sheet, enabled us to return almost $900 million of capital to shareholders during the quarter, including $628 million of share repurchases. At the same time, we continue to make strategic investments in our business. Even after this deployment of capital, adjusted book value per share was up 15% compared to a year ago.

With strong results over the past year and a particularly light cat quarter, we have a higher than usual level of excess capital and liquidity. Consequently, we anticipate a higher level of share repurchase over the next couple of quarters. Dan will have more to say about that in a minute. Turning to the top line, we grew net written premiums to $11.5 billion in the quarter. In business insurance, we grew net written premiums by 3% to $5.7 billion, led by 4% growth in our domestic business. Excluding the property line, we grew domestic net written premiums in the segment by more than 6%. The declining premium volume in property continues to be a large account dynamic.

In fact, we grew property in both middle market and small commercial. We’ve seen this dynamic in the large property market before, and we won’t compromise our underwriting discipline. Over time, particularly as catastrophic events inevitably unfold, the value of that discipline and the cost to those who abandon it will become unmistakable. Renewal premium and change in business insurance was 7.1%, driven by continued historically high RPC in our middle market and select business businesses. Excluding the property line, renewal premium change in the segment was a very strong 9%, and renewal rate change was a very strong 6.7%. Greg will share additional detail by line. Retention in the segment was 85%.

Given the high quality of the book, we were very pleased with that result. In Bond and Specialty Insurance, we grew net written premiums to $1.1 billion with higher renewal premium change and continued strong retention of 87% in our high-quality management liability business. Net written premiums in our market-leading surety business remained strong. In personal insurance, written premiums were $4.7 billion with strong renewal premium change in our homeowners business. You’ll hear more shortly from Greg, Jeff, and Michael about our segment results. As we head toward the end of the year, our planning for 2026 is well underway. As always, that process involves assessing the environment ahead.

There are uncertainties out there: economic, political, geopolitical, not to mention the loss environment. We are very confident that we’re built and very well positioned for whatever lies ahead. We’re operating from a position of considerable strength. Profitability is strong, reflecting our leading underwriting expertise and the operating leverage we’ve built through a sustained focus on productivity and efficiency. Our competitive advantages have never been stronger or more relevant. Strong underwriting is the flywheel that sets everything in motion. Our premium growth at attractive margins has generated strong cash flow, which enables us to make strategic investments in our business, return excess capital to shareholders, and grow our investment portfolio.

Since 2016, we have successfully invested $13 billion in technology, returned more than $20 billion of excess capital to our shareholders, and grown our investment portfolio by nearly 50% to more than $100 billion. Scale matters, increasingly so. We have the scale to win in an environment where technology and AI will continue to segment the marketplace. We have a track record of identifying the right strategic priorities and driving value from them. You can see that in the 300 basis point reduction we’ve achieved in our expense ratio since 2016, even while we were significantly increasing our overall technology spend.

Importantly, our size gives us the data to power AI, creating a virtuous cycle: better insights, better decisions, better outcomes, more resources to invest. For example, our long-time focus on organizing and curating data has given us access to more than 65 billion clean data points from decades of history across multiple business lines. We leverage that to sharpen our underwriting and shape our claim strategies. With the vast majority of our business in North America, we hold a leading position in the largest and most stable insurance market in the world, an advantage that insulates us from much of the risk arising from the economic instability and geopolitical uncertainty around the globe.

Our fortress balance sheet and exceptional cash flow provide us with the financial strength to invest consistently in the business regardless of the external conditions. Our financial strength also enables us to manage comfortably through large loss events like the January California wildfires. When it comes to the loss environment, from weather volatility to the impact of social inflation on casualty lines, no one is better positioned. Diversification provides powerful protection. In fact, our business mix produces a consolidated loss ratio that’s actually less volatile than the loss ratio of our least volatile segment. That’s the power of a balanced and diversified portfolio. Equally important is our demonstrated ability to confront the loss environment head-on.

We have the data, the analytics, and the discipline to establish reserves and loss picks appropriately and generally ahead of the market. That matters because until you have an accurate view of the loss environment, your risk selection, underwriting, and claim strategies are all operating with the wrong inputs. Since our early identification of the acceleration of social inflation in 2019, we’ve grown the business and delivered significantly improved margins. Getting an accurate and timely view of the loss environment isn’t just about the balance sheet. It’s foundational to running the business effectively. Our internally managed investment portfolio was another source of strength.

Our disciplined focus on achieving appropriate risk-adjusted returns has served us exceptionally well through various markets, especially during periods of market turmoil. More than 90% of our portfolio is in fixed income with an average credit rating of AA. We’re highly selective. We don’t reach for yield. We hold the vast majority of our fixed income securities to maturity. And we carefully coordinate the duration of our assets and liabilities. The track record speaks for itself. Our default rates during the most challenging environments over the past two decades were a fraction of industry averages. This consistency comes from a world-class investment team, with extraordinary tenure and a shared long-term perspective.

In short, the franchise we’ve built, the capabilities we’ve developed, and our depth of expertise create advantages that are durable across operating environments. Before I wrap up, I’ll share that we’re just back from one of the industry’s premier conferences, where we had the opportunity to meet with dozens of our key agents and brokers, who collectively represent a substantial amount of our business. We left as convinced as ever that our position with the independent distribution channel is an unmatched strategic advantage. We heard clearly that our strategic investments are resonating and that looking ahead, we’re focused on the right priorities to extend that advantage. I want to acknowledge and thank all of our distribution partners.

I also want to reiterate our unwavering commitment to being an indispensable partner for them and the undeniable choice for their customers. To sum it up, we’re very well positioned and very optimistic about the road ahead. And with that, I’m pleased to turn the call over to Dan.

Dan Frey: Thank you, Alan. In the third quarter, we once again delivered excellent financial results on a consolidated basis and in each of our three segments. Core income for the quarter of $1.9 billion resulted in core return on equity of 22.6%, reflecting both excellent underwriting results and strong investment income. We generated higher levels of written premium and earned premium while delivering excellent combined ratios on both a reported and underlying basis. At 83.9%, the underlying combined ratio marked its fourth consecutive quarter below 85. The combination of higher premiums and the excellent underlying combined ratio led to an 18% increase in after-tax underlying underwriting income, which surpassed $1 billion for the fifth consecutive quarter.

The expense ratio for the third quarter was 28.6%, bringing the year-to-date expense ratio to 28.5%. We continue to expect an expense ratio of around 28% for the full year 2025 and expect to manage to that level again in 2026. Catastrophe losses in the quarter were fairly benign at $42 million pretax, consisting mainly of tornado hail events in the Central United States. Turning to prior year reserve development, we had total net favorable development of $22 million pretax. In Business Insurance, the annual asbestos review resulted in a charge of $277 million. Excluding asbestos, business insurance had net favorable PYD of $152 million driven by continued favorability in workers’ comp.

In Bond and Specialty, net favorable PYD was $43 million pretax with favorability in Fidelity and Surety. Personal insurance had net favorable PYD of $104 million pretax driven by favorability in auto. After-tax net investment income of $850 million increased by 15% from the prior year quarter. Fixed maturity NII was again the driver of the increase, reflecting both the benefit of higher invested assets and higher average yields. Returns in the non-fixed income portfolio were also up from the prior year quarter. During the quarter, we grew our investment portfolio by approximately $4 billion. Our outlook for fixed income NII, including earnings from short-term securities, has increased from the outlook we provided a quarter ago.

And we now expect approximately $810 million after tax in the fourth quarter. For 2026, we expect more than $3.3 billion, with quarterly figures starting at around $810 million in Q1 and growing to around $885 million in Q4. New money rates as of September 30 are roughly 70 to 75 basis points above the yield embedded in the portfolio. Turning to capital management. Operating cash flows for the quarter were a new record at $4.2 billion, and we ended the quarter with holding company liquidity of approximately $2.8 billion.

Interest rates decreased during the quarter, and as a result, our net unrealized investment loss decreased from $3 billion after tax at June 30 to $2 billion after tax at September 30. Adjusted book value per share, which excludes net unrealized investment gains and losses, was $150.55 at quarter end, up 8% from year end and up 15% from a year ago. Also of note for Q3, we issued $1.25 billion of debt back in July, with $500 million of ten-year notes and $750 million of thirty-year notes. This was simply ordinary course capital management, maintaining a debt-to-capital ratio in our target range as we continue to grow the business.

Sticking with the theme of capital management, we returned $878 million of our capital to shareholders this quarter, comprising share repurchases of $628 million and dividends of $250 million. As Alan shared, our very strong earnings over the past year have provided us with an elevated level of capital and liquidity well in excess of what we had planned to use for investment and to support continued growth. As a result, we expect to increase the level of share repurchases in the fourth quarter to roughly $1.3 billion.

Also, keep in mind that we previously shared our plan to deploy about $700 million from the sale of our Canadian operations, expected to close in early 2026, for additional share repurchases as well. So if we look across the three-quarter period from Q3 2025 through Q1 2026, our repurchases in Q3 combined with our current outlook for the next two quarters has us repurchasing a total of somewhere around $3.5 billion worth of our stock. Using the average share price over the past thirty days for purchases during the next two quarters, that would result in a reduction of our outstanding share count of about 5% in the nine-month period.

Of course, the actual amount and timing of repurchases will depend on a number of factors, including the timing of the closing of the transaction in Canada, actual quarterly earnings, and other factors we disclose in our SEC filings. Recapping our results, Q3 was another quarter of excellent underwriting profitability on both an underlying and as-reported basis, and another quarter of rising net investment income. These strong fundamentals delivered core return on equity of 22.6% for the quarter and 18.7% on a trailing twelve-month basis, and position us very well to continue delivering strong results in the future. And now for a discussion of results in Business Insurance, I’ll turn the call over to Greg.

Greg Toczydlowski: Thanks, Dan. Business Insurance had a very strong quarter, delivering a record third-quarter segment income of $907 million and an all-in combined ratio of 92.9%. The quarter reflected relatively benign catastrophes and the continued strong contribution from our exceptional underlying underwriting results. This quarter’s underlying combined ratio of 88.3% marked the twelfth consecutive quarter where we’ve produced an underlying combined ratio below 90%. We’re pleased that our ongoing strategic investments have contributed to this sustained level of profitability. In particular, through meaningful advancements in data and analytics, we continue to advance our underwriting tools.

One specific highlight is the development and utilization of sophisticated models that derive risk characteristics, refine technical pricing, and summarize historical and modeled loss experience, all of which is provided to our underwriters at the point of sale. Moving to the top line, our net written premiums increased to an all-time third-quarter high of $5.7 billion. We grew our leading middle market and select businesses by 7% and 4%, respectively. These two markets make up 70% of the net written premiums in business insurance. We saw a decline in net written premiums in National Property and Other, which, as you heard from Alan, reflects our disciplined execution in terms of risk selection, pricing, and terms and conditions.

As for production across the segment, pricing remained attractive with renewal premium change just over 7%. Renewal premium change remains strong in select and middle market. From a line of business perspective, renewal premium change was positive in all lines, double digits in umbrella, CMP, and auto, and up from the second quarter or stable in all lines other than property. As you heard from Alan, excluding the property line, renewal premium change in this segment was 9%. Retention remained excellent at 85%, and new business of $673 million was about flat to a very strong prior year level. We’re very pleased with these production results and particularly our field’s execution for our proven segmentation strategy.

Across the book, pricing and retention results this quarter reflect excellent execution, aligning price, terms, and conditions with environmental trends for each lot. As for the individual businesses, in select, renewal premium change of 10.8% was about flat with the second quarter. Retention ticked up as expected as we near completion of our targeted CMP risk return optimization efforts. And lastly, for Select, we generated new business of $134 million, up 3% over the prior year. As we’ve mentioned previously, we’ve made meaningful strategic investments in this market in both product and user experience.

Our new BOP and auto products have been well received in the market, and we’re pleased that the industry-leading segmentation contained in both products is contributing to profitable growth. We’re also very pleased with the success of Travis, our digital experience platform for our distribution partners. As we continue our strategic rollout, Travis is already producing over 1 million transactions annually. In our core middle market business, renewal premium change of 8.3% was also about flat sequentially from the second quarter. Price increases remain broad-based as we achieved higher prices on more than three-quarters of our middle market accounts. And at the same time, the granular execution was excellent, with meaningful spread from our best-performing accounts to our lower-performing accounts.

We’re pleased that retention of 88% remained exceptional given the level of price increases we achieved. And finally, new business of $391 million was our highest ever third-quarter result and up 7% over the prior year. We’re pleased with the new business risk selection and strength of pricing and overall with the combination of strong returns and customer growth in middle market. On a strategic note for middle market, we continue to enhance our industry-leading underwriting workstation with models that assess new business opportunities for risk characteristics with the propensity to produce the highest level of lifetime profitability.

This information helps our field organization focus on the highest priority opportunities, resulting in a greater likelihood of success in winning more accounts that contribute to strong margins. To sum up, Business Insurance had another terrific quarter. We’re pleased with our execution in driving strong financial and production results while continuing to invest in the business for long-term profitable growth. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Jeff.

Jeffrey Klenk: Thanks, Greg. Bond and Specialty delivered very strong third-quarter results. We generated segment income of $250 million and an outstanding combined ratio of 81.6%, nearly one point better than the prior year quarter. The strong underlying combined ratio of 85.8% drove very attractive returns in the segment. Turning to the top line, we grew net written premiums in the quarter to $1.1 billion. In our high-quality domestic management liability business, renewal premium change improved to 3.7% while retention remained strong at 87%. These results reflect our intentional and segmented initiatives to improve pricing in certain lines, with a focus on employment practices liability, cyber, and public company D&O.

We’re pleased with the strong underlying pricing segmentation achieved by our outstanding field organization on both renewal and new business, enabled by our advanced analytics and sophisticated pricing models. New business was lower than in 2024, as Corvus production was reflected as new business in the prior year quarter and is now mostly reflected as renewal premium. Comparisons to prior year new business levels will be similarly impacted for the remainder of the year. Outside of the Corvus impact, we’re pleased with early returns on multiple tech and operational investments we’ve made to drive account growth. For example, in our private and nonprofit business, we’re leveraging predictive analytics and AI to enhance our customer segmentation and sales effectiveness.

We’re pleased that these initiatives drove a 40% increase in new lines of business sold to existing customers as compared to the prior year quarter. Turning to our market-leading surety business, where production can be lumpy based on the timing of bonded construction projects, net written premiums remain strong relative to the record high quarter in the prior year. This reflects our customers’ continued confidence in our industry-leading surety expertise and value-added service offerings, as well as benefits from digital investments we’ve made to enhance distribution experiences in our small commercial surety business.

So we’re pleased to have once again delivered strong results this quarter, driven by our continued underwriting and risk management diligence, excellent execution by our field organization, and the benefits of our market-leading competitive advantages. And with that, I’ll turn the call over to Mike.

Michael Klein: Thanks, Jeff, and good morning, everyone. In Personal Insurance, we delivered third-quarter segment income of $807 million, an excellent result that reflects the continued impact of our disciplined approach to selecting, pricing, and managing risks. The combined ratio of 81.3% improved 11 points relative to the prior year quarter, driven primarily by lower catastrophe losses and a lower underlying combined ratio. The underlying combined ratio of 77.7% was five points better compared to the prior year quarter, driven by continued improvement in both homeowners and other and auto.

Net written premiums of $4.7 billion in the third quarter reflect our continued focus on improving profitability in homeowners while seeking growth in auto as we execute our strategies to deliver appropriate risk-adjusted returns across the portfolio. The ceded premium impact of the enhanced personal insurance excess of loss reinsurance program we announced last quarter reduced net written premium growth in the quarter by one point as the full year’s worth of ceded premium was booked in the third quarter. In auto, the third-quarter combined ratio was very strong at 84.9%, reflecting lower catastrophe losses, a strong underlying combined ratio, and favorable net prior year development.

The underlying combined ratio of 88.3% improved by 2.9 points compared to the prior year quarter. The improvement was driven by favorable loss experience in bodily injury and, to a lesser extent, vehicle coverages. Similar to last year’s third-quarter result, this quarter’s underlying combined ratio included a two-point benefit related to the re-estimation of prior quarters and the current year. The year-to-date underlying combined ratio was also 88.3%, reflecting sustained profitability in an auto book that is larger than it was five years ago, both in terms of premium dollars and policy count.

Looking ahead to 2025, it’s important to remember that the fourth-quarter auto underlying loss ratio has historically been six to seven points above the average for the first three quarters because of winter weather and holiday driving. In Homeowners and Other, the third-quarter combined ratio of 78% improved by 13.5 points compared to the prior year quarter, primarily because of lower catastrophe losses and improvement in the underlying combined ratio. Net prior year development was favorable but lower compared to the prior year. The underlying combined ratio of 68% improved by almost 6.5 points compared to the prior year quarter. The year-over-year favorability in homeowners was primarily related to the benefit of earned pricing, as well as favorable non-catastrophe weather.

Overall, these outstanding results reflect favorable weather conditions throughout the third quarter, along with our actions to manage exposures in high catastrophe risk geographies to help optimize risk and reward. Turning to production, we’re making progress in positioning our diversified portfolio to deliver long-term profitable growth. While our production results don’t quite show it yet, we’re confident that the actions we’re taking will build momentum toward this objective. In domestic auto, retention of 82% remained consistent with recent quarters. Renewal premium change of 3.9% continued to moderate and will continue to decline in the fourth quarter, reflective of improved profitability and our focus on generating growth.

Auto new business premium was up year over year for the fourth consecutive quarter, as new business momentum continued in states less impacted by our property actions. In Homeowners and Other, retention of 84% remained relatively consistent with recent quarters. Renewal premium change remained strong at 18%, as we continue to align replacement costs with insured values. We expect RPC to remain elevated in the fourth quarter and then drop into single digits beginning in early 2026 as values will have largely aligned with replacement costs. We continued to execute actions to reduce exposure and manage volatility in high-risk catastrophe geographies in the quarter, causing further declines in property new business premium and policies in force.

Most of our property actions will be completed by the end of the year, at which point the downward pressure on both property and auto growth should begin to moderate. As we conclude this year and head into 2026, we’re focused on building momentum toward generating profitable growth.

To that end, we have a range of actions currently or soon to be in market, including the following: adjusting pricing, appetite, terms, and conditions to better reflect improved profitability in both Auto and Home; removing temporary binding restrictions and winding down some of our property new non-renewal actions in certain geographies; appointing new agents and partnering with existing agents to consolidate books of business; continuing to modernize our specialty products and platforms; and investing in artificial intelligence and digitization to deliver better experiences for our agents and customers. These messages resonate as we share them in the marketplace, reinforcing our commitment to being the undeniable choice for consumers and an indispensable partner for our agents.

To sum up, we delivered terrific segment income as our team continued to invest in capabilities and deliver value to customers and agents. These results position us well to build on a long track of profitably growing our business over time. Now I’ll turn the call back over to Abby.

Abbe Goldstein: Thanks, Michael. And with that, we’re ready to open up for Q&A.

Operator: Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. Your first question today comes from the line of Gregory Peters from Raymond James.

Gregory Peters: Well, good morning, everyone. Boy, you’re producing great bottom line results. Kind of surprising the stock’s down as much as it is on the open. I think it’s probably a reflection of the top line. And I know you spoke in detail about the different headwinds that you’re facing, whether it’s in business insurance, the property, Corvus and Bond and Specialty, or the underwriting actions in personal insurance that have affected your top line. When you go beyond the balance of this year and you start thinking at 26%, 27%, what does the Travelers business model look like in terms of top line growth on a consolidated basis? And how are you thinking about them?

Alan Schnitzer: Hey, good morning, Greg. It’s Alan. Thanks for the thoughts and the question. So we’re not going to give outlook on the top line, as you can imagine. But clearly, we understand that in order to meet our objective of delivering industry-leading return on equity over time, we need to grow over time. So it’s a priority for us. And if you look back over the last couple of years, we’ve been very successful with that. In our, you know, we, as you noted by segment, we’ve talked about what’s driving the results this quarter. But I guess what I would say is we are very confident that we’ve got the right value proposition.

We’re investing in the right capabilities to make sure we’re positioned to grow this business. So we feel very good about the execution in the quarter. We feel very good about what we’ve accomplished in recent periods, and we feel very good about the outlook.

Gregory Peters: Okay. The other I seem to ask this like every other quarter on the technology front, but you keep bringing it up, talked about the digital initiative you have going on in business insurance. Talk about some of the stuff going on in personal insurance. I think one of your peers came out earlier in the third quarter and talked about the potential of artificial intelligence to deliver human resource savings and headcount reductions over time of maybe up to 20%.

I’m just curious if we can just go back to, I know you’ve got best use case on technology and AI, but go back to how you’re thinking about this in the three to five-year period in terms of what it might mean to your expense ratio?

Alan Schnitzer: Yes. So Greg, I’ll tell you, we are very bullish on AI, and we’re leaning into it. You know, we’re spending, you know, more than a billion dollars a year on technology. A lot of that is focused on AI. We expect significant benefits from it. And I think we’ve got a long track record, as I said in my prepared remarks, of identifying the right strategic initiatives and driving value from them. We’re not going to tell you what our plan is for the expense ratio beyond next year, but I’ll also tell you that more than our focus is on the expense ratio, it’s on creating operating leverage.

And that’s what gives us the flexibility to deploy those gains however we want to deploy them. And so maybe it’ll be efficiency, maybe it’ll be productivity, but we are very bullish about the opportunity for investments that we have underway. We’re very bullish about the data we have to fuel the AI. And think that it’ll make a big difference in the years to come.

Gregory Peters: Got it. Thanks for the answers.

Operator: Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of David Motemaden from Evercore. Your line is open.

David Motemaden: Hey, thanks. Good morning. I had a question. You gave the RPC and rate ex property. I was wondering, that’s a new disclosure. Wondering if you can just talk about what that was last quarter versus this quarter and then maybe zooming in specifically in business insurance. What do you guys see in property pricing outside of national property this quarter?

Greg Toczydlowski: Yes, certainly. Well, on the first one, David, it is a metric that we’re not going to give every quarter, and we’re not going to go back and give that. We offered it up this quarter just to give you some color and let you know how much property the leverage it had on the pricing for this particular quarter. As we’ve shared with you, the large property has definitely been a market where typically leads in terms of when softening may happen, and it certainly has been the case over the last couple of quarters. In the select and middle market, to directly answer your question, we continue to get positive price increases there.

But it’s certainly, we’re feeling some deceleration. But again, certainly still seeing positive increases.

David Motemaden: Got it. Thank you. And then maybe this is just sort of related to your answer there. But on business insurance premium growth by market. So it’s good to see the tick up in select year over year and national accounts, you know, sort of we know the story there. But I’m surprised we saw the deceleration in growth in middle market. I was hoping you could just impact that a little bit. Is that just sort of the property dynamics you just mentioned?

Greg Toczydlowski: Yes. And if you’re looking at overall quarter of middle market, I think you’re reading that wrong. The quarter alone was up for middle market 7% relative to year to date of five.

David Motemaden: Got it. Yeah. No, I was just looking at the because I know 1Q had the reinsurance dynamic. So I was just comparing it to 2Q, the 10 decelerating to seven. That’s what I was looking at there. But, no, appreciate the answer.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Mike Zaremski from BMO. Your line is open.

Michael Zaremski: Great. My first question is on the loss cost trend line. I know it’s not easy pinning a broad brush, but if we look at kind of your reserve release trend line, loss ratio trend line, we’re also adding IBNR. But a lot of good things going on. Curious if your view on loss cost inflation has changed at all or directionally, is it the I feel like you’ve only raised it over recent years. Over long periods of time. It flattening out? Thanks.

Dan Frey: Hey, Mike, it’s Dan. So another quarter of net favorable PYD despite the asbestos charge. I don’t really think you can put a trend on PYD. Really what matters for us is in aggregate across the enterprise is that favorable or unfavorable, and we’ve got now a very long track record of generally having that favorable. As it relates to loss trend, we haven’t explicitly commented on loss trend for a while because we think it’s just too narrow a way to look at the business in terms of what’s pure rate versus what’s some blended number of loss trend, but it hasn’t moved dramatically in recent periods. Alan’s talked about that in prior quarters.

We do take a look at it every quarter. Some lines do move up a little bit. Some lines do move down a little bit over time. But it’s been pretty stable for a while now. Mike, there was nothing in the quarter that particularly surprised us when it comes to loss activity.

Michael Zaremski: Okay, great. And my follow-up is honing in on the home segment. Maybe you need a comment on auto too since there’s a lot of bundle in there. But if we look at the RPC trends, they remain very high on I’m assuming there’s terms and conditions changes that you’re incorporating in kind of those double-digit RPC increases. But the last few years haven’t been great for you all in the industry. Consensus kind of has you guys pegged at a 95 combined ratio for the foreseeable future in home. If you can kind of remind us what do we expect RPC to eventually fall? Are those terms and conditions changes going to help?

Is 95% the right combined ratio that you guys are targeting given how profitable auto is? Thanks.

Michael Klein: Sure. Thanks, Mike. It’s Michael. So just to unpack the RPC part of your question for starters, as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, RPC remains elevated. Again, it’s rate and exposure, right? So RPC remains elevated largely because we’re raising insured limits to keep up with rising replacement costs. And my point about RPC dropping to single digits in 2026 is we’ll have largely caught up in getting replacement costs in line with insured values. And so the change in RPC as we head into 2026 will really be those the premium impact from increasing coverage A, the dwelling limits on property coming back to more normal levels.

Yes, baked into RPC is also a reflection of a number of the other actions we’re taking on the book. I think increasing deductibles, particularly across the Midwest, think different strategies around targeted limits on how big a coverage A we’re going to write in some hail-prone geographies, other things like that are all rolled into that figure. And again, I think it’s just reflective of the actions that we’re taking to improve the profitability of that book. As respect to target combined ratio, we’re not going to really disclose the target combined ratio by line. We are certainly encouraged by the progress we’ve made, particularly in improving the underlying combined ratio in property.

It’s down period to period, quarter over quarter for something like the last ten or eleven quarters in a row. So it’s demonstrative of the progress that we’re making there. And again, continue to be pleased with our progress there.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Meyer Shields from KBW. Your line is open.

Meyer Shields: Great, thanks. Good morning. I don’t know if this is a question for Alan or Greg, but is there really a disentangling the how much of a property premium decline in BI is from nonrenewed business as opposed to accepting lower rates because you still have adequacy?

Alan Schnitzer: Meyer, I don’t think we’re gonna unpack that. Certainly not right here right now. I don’t think we’re gonna get into that level of detail. And I honestly, we don’t have that level of data at our fingertips right now.

Meyer Shields: Okay. Fair enough. Also, to talk a little bit, Michael talked about, I guess, book rolls in personal lines. Does that involve any changes to agency commissions? Or what other tools are you using to encourage that?

Michael Klein: Sure, Meyer. Thanks for the question. Yes. So typically, and again, book growth consolidations in the personal lines space are pretty much standard operating procedure. We had stepped away from them. The reason I mentioned it is because we had stepped away from them as we were working to improve profitability. And I think it’s an important point to recognize that we’re back actively engaged in the marketplace in those conversations with agents looking for situations where their book of business may be disrupted for one reason or another. It is fairly typical in a book consolidation scenario to offer enhanced commission on that book roll for the first term as that business comes over.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Tracey Banque from Wolfe Research. Your line is open.

Tracey Banque: Good morning. My first question is for Mike. I’m curious what you’re seeing that’s driving favorable loss experience in bodily injury. And, to a lesser extent, vehicle coverages?

Michael Klein: Tracy. Thanks for the question. I mean, really is a combination of favorable frequency in both bodily injury and physical damage losses, as well as continued moderation in severity again really across coverages.

Tracey Banque: Got it. And a follow-up on Dan’s comment about elevated level of capital liquidity. Driven by your earnings that’s well in excess of your investment needed to growth. As you know, capital is a big focus for me. And I’ve really not seen so much excess capital for the entire sector. Is it fair to assume that your excess capital position surpasses the buyback targets you shared and could we expect concurrent deployment of capital on the technology side and or M and A.

Dan Frey: Yes, Tracy, it’s Dan. So I think I understand the question. So I guess I’d start by saying, look, there’s no change at all to what has been now our long-standing capital management philosophy, which is we’ve got a business that’s generating terrific margins. We generate a lot of capital. We generate more than we need just to support the growth of the business. First objective for that excess capital is going to be to find a way to deploy it and generate a return. And so we’ll make all the technology investments that we think we can and should make. Always be open to M and A, open to any opportunity to generate returns on an excess capital.

Once we’ve exhausted all those opportunities, then it’s not our capital, it’s the shareholders we’re going to give it back through dividends and buybacks.

Tracey Banque: Got it. Thank you.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Robert Cox from Goldman Sachs. Your line is open.

Robert Cox: Hey, thanks. Good morning. Yes, just wanted to go back to the removal of the growth restrictions. It looks like a couple of parts of the business, CMP, within Select and then also in homeowners you give us a sense of how much business is being unlocked for growth here? And if easing those can result in a noticeable uplift in growth?

Greg Toczydlowski: Robert, this is Greg. I’ll start off and then Michael can talk about the PI. We’ve been talking about the select mix optimization for some time now. And as we begin to finalize some of those actions, you saw a slight tick up in our retention. We’re not really going to quantify what that means for overall growth, but that was the reason that we pointed out the slight pickup in retention.

Michael Klein: Yeah. And Robert, Michael, up here on the personal lines side. I think the important point to note in terms of the impact on growth in personal insurance as we relax those property restrictions as our goal is to leverage that property capacity to write package business. And so if you my suggestion, if you want to sort of dimensionalize it, is just look back historically at retention in new business levels in property and in auto. You can see that retention remains depressed right now given the actions we’re taking. Again, the property actions depressed retention in both lines.

And you can see particularly in property the new business levels are pretty significantly depressed relative to what they’ve run historically. And so those levers, I think, would give you a way to kind of dimensionalize it.

Robert Cox: Okay, great. Thanks for the color there. And then I just wanted to follow-up on the business insurance underlying loss ratio. When you think about the margin improvements during this year, are we seeing improved picks in casualty at all? Or is the improvement year to date largely been a shift lower in some of the shorter tail exposures?

Dan Frey: Hey, Rob, it’s Dan. Look, I think if you look at the improvement in you’re talking about business insurance specifically, right?

Robert Cox: Yes. Is that correct?

Dan Frey: Yes. I think the single biggest factor we’d say in terms of that sort of 50 basis point improvement on a year-to-date basis has been the continued benefit of earned price. So in the casualty lines especially, and we’ve talked about this a couple of times, we’re continuing to include some provision for a level of uncertainty in those lines that we think is going to serve us well in the long term as opposed to taking those picks down the improvement in the loss ratio. You have other things that impact every quarter too. Mix will change a little bit.

But headline number the main driver of the improvement year over year has been the continued benefit of earned price.

Robert Cox: Thank you.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Elyse Greenspan from Wells Fargo. Your line is open.

Elyse Greenspan: Hi, good morning. I guess I want to stick there with business insurance. So if we look I guess, just specifically at the underlying loss ratio that was stable year over year in the Q3. So I’m not sure if there were certain pushes and pulls that you want to point out specific to the third quarter or if maybe this quarter rate you know, earned rate, you know, got close to trend and that’s kind of what we’re seeing in the numbers. And just how do we think from here, you know, just given, you know, slowing pricing, which I know is mostly driven by fiber property, do we think about just the underlying loss ratio and BI?

Should we think about that starting to deteriorate as rate gets closer to trend?

Dan Frey: Yeah. Good morning, Elyse. Let’s just start with where the margins are in business. I mean, they are pretty spectacular margins. And I don’t think we’re to parse out that level of detail. We’re certainly not going to get into what the outlook for margins is. But I’ll tell you at these margins, we really like the margins and we really like the business that we’re putting on the books at these margins.

Elyse Greenspan: Okay. And then I guess, you know, my second question would be, I guess, maybe shifting to personal auto. Have you guys did you guys see any impact of tariffs at all in the quarter, whether it was September relative to July and August? And how are you guys currently thinking about a potential impact of tariffs on the margins in that business?

Michael Klein: Sure Elyse, it’s Michael. Thanks for the question. I would say we haven’t seen a ton of impact to date from tariffs. But our results for the third quarter do include a small impact from tariffs. That said, it’s well below the single-digit severity numbers that we discussed a couple of quarters ago. There certainly is the potential for that impact to grow the longer tariffs remain in effect. As you know, it’s a very fluid situation. Tariff changes weekly, daily, fairly frequently. So predicting is challenging, but we are keeping a very close eye on it. To your point, there are some external industries that show some moderate increases. Others look largely unaffected.

So we’re going to continue to closely monitor it. But there is a little bit of a provision in the third quarter results for tariff increases, but it’s not yet at the level that we had potentially forecast. And just to be clear, Michael, correct me if I’m wrong, we’ve got a provision in there because we expected that we might see it. We’re not really seeing it in any meaningful way.

Michael Klein: Yes. It’s significant. Again, we’re seeing it on the margins, and so we booked the provision for it. But again, well below the mid-single-digit level that we had described before.

Elyse Greenspan: Thank you.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Paul Newsome from Piper Sandler. Your line is open.

Paul Newsome: Good morning. Yesterday, Progressive gave us a little unpleasant news about their poor charge. Just curious if that is something that you’ve looked at yourself and I’m also curious about the accounting related to these kinds of things. I know that orders not unique. There are other states that have restrictions on proper on profitability. Just curious about how you account for that as well.

Michael Klein: Sure, Paul. It’s Michael. I’ll start with sort of response on the overall situation. Maybe Dan can chime in on accounting. The Florida excess profit provision and the statute isn’t actually a new thing. It’s sort of standard operating procedure in Florida. It’s actually fairly infrequent that people have to return premiums given the statute. What I would say about our business in Florida is we’re pleased with our auto business in Florida. But we don’t expect to need to make a return of premium to policyholders in Florida due to excess profits for the 2023 to 2025 accident year period for which we would make the filing in 2026.

The other thing I would say is given the size of our business in Florida, think of our Florida auto business less than 10% of our PI auto business. Think of the Florida PI auto business 1.5% of Travelers’ overall premium. I mean, it’s just not going to be a significant issue for the organization even if we were to need to make a return of premium, which we don’t anticipate.

Dan Frey: Then Paul, it’s Dan. With regard to the accounting, I guess I’m going to not give a definitive answer. And one of the reasons I won’t give a definitive answer is if you go back to COVID, when we and some of our peer companies returned premium because frequency and losses declined so rapidly, so quickly, not every company accounted for that the same way. So we had a view of how that should be accounting for. That’s what we reflected in our results. Other peer companies had slightly different view of how that should be accounted for.

And reflected it differently in their results, by which I mean some companies took that as an expense, some companies took that as a return to premium. And as Michael said, since we’ve not had to deal with the Florida excess profit issue, we haven’t done a real deep dive on how we think it would come through the P and L. But most importantly, I think as Michael said, we ever had it, we wouldn’t expect it to be much of an impact on our consolidated results in any event.

Paul Newsome: Great. That’s super helpful. That’s all I had. Appreciate it.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Josh Shanker from Bank of America. Your line is open.

Josh Shanker: Yes. Very much for taking my question here at the end. I was trying to understand a little bit about the retention effective retention numbers that you give in the back of the supplement about auto and home. Your retention bottomed, I guess, about three quarters ago. And it’s ticked up, but you’re still losing more of cars or more policies than you were before. Is that a projected retention based on where you’re pricing the business today, or have you already seen retention bottom and it’s improving here?

Dan Frey: Josh, it’s Dan. So retention is a way that we try to give you color relative to what’s the change in net written premium. So a couple of things we know definitively. We know definitively at any point in time how many policies are enforced. We give you that number. We know definitively at any point in time how much premium made it into the ledger. We give you that number. Production statistics like retention, renewal premium change, new business, are all in the disclosure say. They’re all subject to actuarial estimate of what do we think the ultimate retention is going to be.

Because you could start on day one of a policy and look like you’d retained all of them, but we know that there’s some peer period of those that are going to cancel early in the term and either go somewhere else or drop their insurance. So it’s very challenging to do, I think, you’re trying to do at a very specific level and go A plus B equals C. Production statistics are really color around what’s happening with the top line. And I’m sorry, can’t give you a more helpful answer than that.

Josh Shanker: If I look back at 3Q 2024, is that a more because now you have all that data. Is that a more accurate representation of what you know to have happened over the past year?

Dan Frey: Production statistics do get updated. So if you went back in true in business insurance, true in personal insurance, if you looked at historical quarters, you could almost do a triangle of what was retention as originally reported because it’s an estimate. We true those up as time goes on.

Josh Shanker: And can you confidently say, and I’ll leave it at this, that retention has improved from where it was a year ago, or it’s still not certain?

Dan Frey: I think we’re pretty confident in saying that retention has improved from where it was a year ago.

Josh Shanker: Okay. Thank you.

Operator: Your next question comes from the line of Alex Scott from Barclays. Your line is open.

Alex Scott: Hey, thanks. First one I have is on commercial auto and general liability. Just noticing, you know, those are, you know, sort of the lines where net written premium is growing more and was just interested in if that’s more a reflection of, you know, the rate’s obviously different there than maybe some of the other lines where there’s pressure. But, you know, is there anything about the commercial auto product launch and some of the things you’re doing that are actually causing you to lean into businesses a little more?

Greg Toczydlowski: Hey, Alex. This is Greg. You know, just to get the second part of your question, we did roll out a new automobile product across all business insurance that includes select and middle market that would roll up into the aggregate commercial auto numbers. So we do think that’s our most sophisticated product in auto that we brought into the marketplace. So that helps us from a segmentation point of view. But we’ve been very thoughtful around our growth in commercial auto. The thrust of what you’re seeing there in premium deltas really is based on renewal premium change. And that’s why I gave you some of that color in my prepared comments at a product line level.

Alex Scott: Got it. Okay. That’s helpful. And over in personal lines, I mean, the appetite you’ve been pretty clear on in that should help on the growth front. Is there anything from just a marketing spend kind of standpoint and thinking through the expense ratio that we should be aware of is you think through ramping up growth?

Michael Klein: Sure, Alex. It’s Michael. I would say that on the margins, we have increased our marketing spend in personal insurance largely in support of our direct-to-consumer business. But it’s a very different ballgame for us than marketing spend other places. Our direct-to-consumer business is less than 10% of our overall business. So we are on the margin increasing marketing spend there to drive more growth. But it doesn’t have a dramatic impact on the overall financial results of the business.

Alex Scott: Got it. Thank you.

Operator: And we have time for one more question. And that question comes from the line of Ryan Tunis from Cantor. Your line is open.

Ryan Tunis: I just had a question, just one on in business insurance, just on incurred loss. But I guess it’s, in national property, we don’t trend losses like we do or property for that matter. We trend losses like we do with other stuff, but certainly are still attritional losses on that line. I guess I’m just curious if those attritional losses have run better or worse or in line with your expectations so far this year? Thanks.

Dan Frey: Hey, Ryan, it’s Dan. I think the quarter results are really strong. Weather was generally leaning towards favorable, including in business insurance. If you’re wondering about whether it’s so significant that we would say this isn’t really a clean jump-off point for business insurance and you’d make some big adjustment, we would say no sort of inside of the normal realm of variability from quarter to quarter, but leaning towards the favorable.

Operator: And we have reached the end of our question and answer session. I will now turn the call back over to Abby Goldstein for closing remarks.

Abbe Goldstein: Thanks, everyone, for joining us today. And as always, please follow up with Investor Relations if you have any other questions. Have a good day.

Operator: This concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.

Source link

How Meta Platform Plans to Win the AI Race

Meta isn’t just chasing AI hype — it’s laying the tracks for the next decade of computing.

Meta Platforms (META 0.52%) is no longer just a social media giant. It’s building one of the world’s largest AI infrastructures, recruiting elite talent, and embedding artificial intelligence into every layer of its ecosystem — from apps and ads to AR glasses.

While OpenAI and Google dominate the spotlight, Meta is quietly constructing the foundation to lead the next decade of AI development. Here’s how it plans to win.

Artificial intelligence icons superimposed over a laptop keyboard.  

Image source: Getty Images.

Building the backbone: A massive infrastructure bet

Meta’s AI ambitions rest on one of the biggest infrastructure buildouts in tech history. The company plans to spend $60 to 65 billion in capital expenditures this year, channeling much of that into data centers and custom AI hardware. By the end of 2025, Meta expects to operate over 1.3 million GPUs — a scale few companies can match.

This massive investment isn’t just brute force spending. It’s a strategic move to gain control. Meta is already testing its own AI chip, designed to reduce reliance on Nvidia and optimize training efficiency. Like Amazon‘s in-house silicon program, this initiative gives Meta tighter control over cost, performance, and innovation speed.

The company is also expanding a global network of data centers equipped with liquid cooling and energy-efficient designs. These facilities will train large language models such as LLaMA 3 and future generations while powering AI-driven features across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp.

For Meta, infrastructure is more than a resource — it’s a moat. Every improvement in computing efficiency compounds across billions of users and trillions of interactions. That scale gives Meta a self-reinforcing infrastructure advantage.

Investing in people

Technology changes fast, but exceptional people adapt and shape the future. Meta understands that better than most. Over the past year, the company has aggressively recruited top AI researchers and engineers from DeepMind, OpenAI, and Anthropic.

In a bold move, Meta hired Alexandr Wang, the founder of Scale AI, to lead its new Superintelligence division. And that’s after investing $14.3 billion in Scale AI, the AI company Wang founded after dropping out of MIT. The hire signals Meta’s intent to compete not just in applied AI but in the broader race toward artificial general intelligence.

Zuckerberg’s philosophy is straightforward: world-class talent compounds like capital. So, it makes sense to spend heavily to acquire the best talent. This strategy is not new to Meta. Years ago, it paid a hefty sum ($16 billion) to acquire WhatsApp early on — mainly for the talent and technology.

While such a strategy does not guarantee an outcome, it has its advantages, particularly in securing the best talents — while eliminating a potential future competitor. That’s precisely what Meta did with its WhatsApp deal, and the learnings from the WhatsApp acquisition helped fuel the development of Messenger, Meta’s own messaging app.

Integration: Hardware, software, and ecosystem

Meta’s most significant edge lies in integration — uniting infrastructure, talent, and products under one ecosystem. The company’s open-source large language model, LLaMA, already powers its AI-driven functions such as real-time translation and intelligent assistants across Messenger and WhatsApp. Each deployment brings new data, which strengthens the next generation of models.

But Meta isn’t stopping at software. Its Reality Labs division is bringing AI into the physical world through devices like the Ray-Ban Meta smart glasses, which include conversational assistance, translation, and image recognition. Zuckerberg envisions a future where AI becomes ambient — invisible, intuitive, and always available.

Over time, Meta’s ecosystem could span everything from LLaMA models running on powerful clusters to lightweight AI running directly on AR glasses or smartphones. With more than 3 billion users, Meta holds an enormous testing ground for refining these systems at scale.

What does it mean for investors?

Meta’s AI strategy isn’t about racing to release the flashiest model. It’s about building the foundation of the next computing era. By investing heavily in hardware, empowering world-class talent, and integrating AI into every layer of its ecosystem, Meta aims to become the operating system of the AI age.

Execution remains the real test. Building trillion-parameter models and next-generation chips is one challenge; translating them into durable products is another. But Meta has a history of thriving when it builds patiently, at scale, and in plain sight. And that’s precisely what it’s doing right now.

Investors looking to invest in AI companies should keep the stock on watch.

Source link

J.B. Hunt (JBHT) Q3 2025 Earnings Call Transcript

Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

DATE

Wednesday, October 15, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. ET

CALL PARTICIPANTS

Chief Executive Officer — Shelley Simpson

Chief Financial Officer — Brad Delco

Executive Vice President, Commercial — Spencer Frazier

Chief Operating Officer — Nick Hobbs

President, Highway Services — Brad Hicks

President, Intermodal — Darren Field

Need a quote from a Motley Fool analyst? Email [email protected]

TAKEAWAYS

Revenue — Roughly flat year over year, indicating limited top-line growth in a soft freight demand environment.

Operating income — Operating income improved 8% compared to the prior year period, reflecting successful cost discipline and margin repair efforts.

Diluted earnings per share — Diluted earnings per share increased 18% compared to the prior year period, despite inflationary headwinds in insurance, wages, and equipment costs.

Share repurchases — Over $780 million used to buy back 5.4 million shares year to date, maintaining balance sheet leverage around one times trailing twelve-month EBITDA.

Cost reduction initiative — More than $20 million of structural costs eliminated, with the majority of the $100 million target expected to be realized in 2026.

Intermodal volume — Decreased 1% year over year, with monthly trends of -3% in July, -2% in August, and flat in September.

Dedicated Contract Services (DCS) sales — Approximately 280 trucks sold, with ongoing visibility to fleet losses resulting in a truck count decline of about 85 units sequentially.

DCS margins — Maintained double-digit margins despite mature location losses and startup costs for new business.

ICS (Brokerage) rates — Reflecting improved new customer wins during the bid season.

Net Promoter Score (NPS) — Achieved a score of 53 in Intermodal.

Final Mile Services — Ongoing demand weakness for furniture, exercise equipment, and appliances, with challenged market conditions expected through year-end and anticipated legacy appliance business losses in 2026.

Safety performance — Achieved record-low DOT preventable accidents per million miles for the third consecutive year, improving further through the current period.

Regulatory impact — Recent U.S. regulations, such as English language proficiency and non-domiciled CDL, are reducing industry capacity but are not materially affecting the company’s own operations.

Technology & automation — Deployed 50 AI agents, automated 60% of third-party check calls, more than 73% of orders are auto-accepted, automated 80% of paper invoice payments, and saved about 100,000 hours annually across highway, dedicated, and CE teams.

Capital allocation priorities — Investment in the business is prioritized over buybacks and dividends, with an emphasis on maintaining investment-grade leverage.

SUMMARY

Management of J.B. Hunt Transport Services (JBHT -0.53%) reiterated strategic clarity on long-term operational excellence, pursuing aggressive cost reductions and process automation to strengthen margins in challenging market conditions. Executive commentary directly addressed the implications of rail industry consolidation, emphasizing the company’s experience in prior mergers and robust long-term agreements with key rail providers. Sequential volume trends in Intermodal highlighted ongoing softness offset by service-driven share gains. Technology deployment and automation initiatives were positioned as critical levers for future efficiency gains and margin sustainability. Near-term expectations for DCS and Final Mile Services included persistent end-market headwinds but pointed to a return to modest fleet growth and targeted business mix shifts in 2025 and 2026. The company explicitly reaffirmed its balanced capital allocation strategy focused on core investment.

Simpson stated, “we are making good progress towards reaching our $100 million savings goal and advancing towards our long-term margin target.”

Delco highlighted, “productivity and cost management efforts more than offset those headwinds to drive our improved results.”

Frazier noted, “truckload capacity continued to exit the market, and the pace of exits is accelerating,” though soft demand is limiting immediate pricing effects.

Spencer Frazier explained that intermodal volumes benefited from conversions “primarily because more customers are converting freight to intermodal from the highway as they see our commitment to operational excellence differentiating J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc.”

Brad Delco directly attributed recent improvements to “service efficiencies, balancing our networks, dynamically serving customers to meet their needs, focusing even more on discretionary spending, and driving greater asset utilization.”

Hicks indicated DCS expects “operating income to be approximately flat compared to 2024,” with potential for further growth in 2026 driven by new business startups.

Simpson emphasized strategic adaptability to rail consolidation: “our scale and influence allow us to coordinate complex intermodal moves and deliver unique solutions for our customers.”

INDUSTRY GLOSSARY

Drayage: The movement of freight over a short distance, typically as part of an intermodal shipment within a port or between rail terminals and customer locations.

DOT preventable accident rate: A safety performance measure calculated as the number of Department of Transportation (DOT)-recordable, preventable accidents per million miles driven.

Steel wheel interchange: The movement of an intermodal rail container car between two railroads without unloading the cargo, typically using physical rail routing connections.

Headhaul/Backhaul: ‘Headhaul’ refers to high-demand freight moves in a preferred direction, often at higher rates; ‘Backhaul’ refers to return moves that typically have lower rates or less freight volume.

IMC: Intermodal Marketing Company — a non-asset third-party intermediary arranging intermodal freight movement between shippers and railroads/trucking firms.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Shelley Simpson: Thank you, Andrew, and good afternoon. Throughout the year, our focus has been on three clear priorities: operational excellence, scaling into our investments, and continuing to repair our margins to drive stronger financial performance. We are executing these priorities with discipline and determination, guided by a strategy designed to strengthen our competitive position and unlock long-term value for our shareholders. I am highly confident that our approach is building a stronger company, one that is fully equipped to capitalize on meaningful growth opportunities ahead while driving stronger financial performance. Across our businesses, service levels remain excellent. We have systemically elevated our service standards to drive disciplined profitable growth with both new and existing customers.

Even as overall freight demand softened during the quarter, our unwavering commitment to service enabled our intermodal and highway businesses to capture additional volume and outperform the market. Operational excellence is now synonymous with J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc., and we are leveraging this reputation to drive strategic growth and maximize returns on our investments to match the unique value and strong service levels we provide for customers. We remain focused on controlling what we can, optimizing costs in the near term without sacrificing our future earnings power potential. In addition, we are placing a heightened emphasis on operational efficiency throughout the organization.

By streamlining processes, adopting best practices, and leveraging technology, we aim to utilize every resource as effectively as possible to maximize productivity and performance. Our initiative to lower our cost to serve, announced last quarter, is focused on removing structural costs from our business. The organization’s collaborative efforts continue to gain momentum, and Brad will share more details on our progress. This initiative marks our latest evolution in expense discipline, and we are making good progress towards reaching our $100 million savings goal and advancing towards our long-term margin target. Now, let me address the elephant in the room: rail consolidation. J.B.

Hunt Transport Services, Inc.’s position is rooted in our commitment to delivering exceptional intermodal service and creating long-term value for our customers and shareholders. We recognize both the opportunities and risks that consolidation presents. But our decades of experience, including navigating seven prior Class I railroad mergers, and our thoughtfully developed long-term agreements and strong relationships with NS, CSX, and BNSF should provide the basis for us to adapt to any changes in the industry. As the largest domestic intermodal provider, our scale and influence allow us to coordinate complex intermodal moves and deliver unique solutions for our customers. We are consistently rated best in class by third-party industry surveys of intermodal customers.

And our ability to deliver seamless, differentiated service across the entire North American intermodal network is a key competitive advantage. Our focus remains on providing reliable, efficient, and innovative service that benefits our customers now and into the future. As the rail industry evolves, we expect our proven adaptability and unwavering dedication to service will not only safeguard our leadership position but should also continuously set higher standards of excellence for our customers. I want to close by recognizing the entire organization for their hard work and progress across many areas of focus. The third quarter is extra special at J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. as it includes National Truck Driver and National Technician Appreciation Week.

Our professional drivers and maintenance teams are the backbone of our success. And their record-breaking safety performance is a testament to their skill, dedication, and attention to safety every day. We appreciate all they do to keep our company, our customers, and our communities safe. With that, I’d like to turn the call over to our newly appointed CFO, Brad Delco.

Brad Delco: Thanks, Shelley, and good afternoon. I will hit on some highlights of the quarter, review our capital allocation plan, and give an update on the lowering our cost to serve initiative. Let me start with the quarter. As you have already seen from our release, revenue was roughly flat year over year while operating income improved 8% and diluted earnings per share improved 18% versus the prior year period. While inflation in insurance, wages, and employee benefits and equipment costs were all up, our productivity and cost management efforts more than offset those headwinds to drive our improved results.

Over the years, you have heard us talk about investing in our long-term growth, maintaining cost discipline without jeopardizing our future earnings power, and creating operating leverage when the market returns. Well, it’s no secret the market hasn’t returned yet, but the notable improvement in our financial performance this quarter should serve as a true testament to the talent and capabilities of the people throughout our organization and the execution of our strategy towards operational excellence in safety, service, and lowering our cost to serve. On capital allocation, our balance sheet remains healthy, maintaining leverage around our target of one times trailing twelve-month EBITDA while purchasing over $780 million or 5.4 million shares of our stock year to date.

This aligns with our messaging around prefunding our long-term future growth during the downturn and having the flexibility with the strong cash flow generation of the business to be opportunistic with share repurchases as a way to return value to our shareholders. We will be disciplined in our capital allocation approach with investing in the business as priority number one, sustaining our investment-grade balance sheet, supporting future dividend growth, and finally continuing our opportunistic repurchases. Last quarter, we outlined our lowering our cost serve initiative to remove $100 million of structural costs from the business. I’m happy to share we are off to a good start, having eliminated greater than $20 million in the quarter.

Examples of our success are in service efficiencies, balancing our networks, dynamically serving customers to meet their needs, focusing even more on discretionary spending, and driving greater asset utilization. We remain committed to updating you on our progress going forward. But our intent is to demonstrate our progress in our reported results rather than just speak to them. As we noted last quarter, we will realize a portion of these benefits this year, with the majority of the impact realized in 2026. Let me close with this and what I hope you take away from our quarter. First, our company continues to execute from a position of strength.

We have been transparent with our strategy, our investments to be best prepared to service our customers’ future capacity needs. Second, we also continue to remove structural costs from the business. We are off to a good start and have more work to do. Third, our business continues to generate a significant amount of cash, and we remain focused on generating strong returns with our deployed capital. We have been opportunistic with our share repurchases, all while maintaining modest leverage on our balance sheet. That concludes my remarks. Now I’d like to turn it over to Spencer.

Spencer Frazier: Thank you, Brad, and good afternoon. I’ll provide an update on our view of the market and some feedback we are hearing from our customers. Overall demand trended below normal seasonality for much of the quarter outside of the seasonal lift we saw at quarter-end. On the supply side, truckload capacity continued to exit the market, and the pace of exits is accelerating. But the soft demand environment is likely muting the market impact of capacity attrition. Outside of recent weeks, truckload spot rates remained under pressure in the quarter. More recent regulatory developments and, more importantly, regulatory enforcement is having an impact on capacity.

While this industry may have a chicken little reputation when it comes to predicting capacity changes, the capacity bubble may be deflating as we speak. In the near term, customers will remain skeptical of any predicted change, only believing it when they experience it. Shifting to intermodal, volumes declined 1% year over year. We believe our volumes held up better relative to the broader truckload market decline, primarily because more customers are converting freight to intermodal from the highway as they see our commitment to operational excellence differentiating J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. Intermodal from the competition.

The service we provide ranks us at the top of our customer scorecards, and we continue to be ranked at the top of industry surveys as well, with a Net Promoter Score of 53. When we go to market, we work with customers to dynamically solve their supply chain needs by designing and executing our operations to meet their requirements. For example, in our intermodal business, customers trust us to select the most efficient service regardless of the rail provider to seamlessly move their freight throughout North America. Today, roughly half of our interchange volume on transcontinental shipments occurs through a steel wheel interchange.

This ratio can change dynamically and demonstrates our ability to be agile at scale to execute and meet our customer expectations. Regardless of how the rail landscape and operating scenarios might change over the next couple of years, we remain committed to delivering exceptional service and growing with our customers. Regarding the current peak season, the strong container volume into the West Coast in July generated headlines regarding a potential pull forward. Ocean peak season came early. That said, it is important to disconnect the timing of peak season on the water from the peak season of the inland supply chain. Our customers are still expecting a peak season, although the magnitude and duration of peak volumes will vary.

Our conversations indicate there is a large amount of freight that was imported early that hasn’t moved through the inland supply chain yet. No one has canceled Christmas. I’ll close with some customer feedback. Our customers realize the financial health of the transportation industry is not great. And as a result, they are choosing to do more with the best carriers and more with fewer carriers. Shippers are focused on creating efficiencies in their supply chains by working with providers who are safe and financially sound and who execute with agility and predictability. Our scroll of services continues to operate from a position of strength, creating value as the go-to transportation provider for our customers.

I would now like to turn the call over to Nick.

Nick Hobbs: Thanks, Spencer, and good afternoon. I’ll provide an update on our areas of focus across our operations, followed by an update on our Final Mile, truckload, and brokerage businesses. I’ll start on our safety performance. Safety is a core piece of our culture and a key differentiator of our value proposition in the market. We are coming off of two consecutive years of record performance measured by DOT preventable accidents per million miles, and our safety results through the third quarter are performing even better than these record performances. This performance is a testament to our people and the attention to detail they bring to the job every day, as well as our focus on proper training and technology.

Our safety performance is a key piece of driving out cost and will continue to be an area of focus. While the ultimate impact on industry capacity is hard to pinpoint, we believe the recent developments on regulations and enforcement, when taken together, could have a noticeable impact on available industry capacity. These include new regulations around English language proficiency, B1 Visas, FMCSA, biometric ID verification, and non-domiciled CDLs. Importantly, for J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc., we do not expect to see any material impact on our capacity. There have been some signs based on what we are seeing in our truck and brokerage operations that it could have a broader industry impact.

Moving to the business, let’s start with the final mile. As we said last quarter, business conditions in our end markets remain challenged with soft demand for furniture, exercise equipment, and appliances. We continue to see positive demand in our fulfillment network driven by off-price retail. Going forward, we expect market conditions to remain challenged through at least year-end. Our focus remains on providing the highest service levels, being safe and secure, ensuring that the value we provide in the market is realized to drive appropriate returns. In 2026, we do anticipate losing some legacy appliance-related business, but we will be working diligently on backfilling with other brands and service offerings in this segment of our business.

Moving to JBT, our focus in this business hasn’t changed, and we are winning business with strong service from both new and existing customers, leading to our highest quarterly volume in over a decade. We are remaining disciplined with our growth to ensure our network remains balanced in order to drive the best utilization of our trailing assets. Going forward, we are pleased with the direction of this business in this soft demand environment and the progress we are making on lowering our cost to serve. We see an opportunity for further efficiency and automation gains in the future as we continue to leverage our 360 platform.

That said, meaningful improvements in our profitability in this business will be driven by greater levels of rate improvement and overall demand for truckload drop trailing solutions. I’ll close with ICS. During the third quarter, volumes modestly improved sequentially as new volume from recent bid wins was partially offset by soft demand in the overall truckload market. Truckload spot rates remained depressed throughout the quarter, but we saw gross margins remain healthy. We are almost through bid season and are pleased with the awards we have received, with rates up low to mid-single digits, winning volume with new customers. Our focus here remains on profitable growth with the right customers where we can differentiate ourselves with service.

Going forward, we will remain focused on scaling into our while continuing to make improvements to our cost structure and leveraging our 360 platform to drive greater efficiency and automation, which will help lower our cost to serve. With that, I’d now like to turn the call over to Brad.

Brad Hicks: Thanks, Nick, and good afternoon everybody. I’ll provide an update on our dedicated results. Starting with the quarter, at a high level, our third quarter results were very strong, particularly in light of this challenging freight environment. We believe our results are a testament to the strength and diversification of our model, the value we create for our customers, and how we drive accountability at each site and customer location. As a result, we continue to see good demand for our professional outsourced private fleet solutions. During the third quarter, we sold approximately 280 trucks of new deals.

As a reminder, our annual net sales target is for 800 to 1,000 new trucks per year, and we would be on pace with this target absent the known losses disclosed almost two years ago. Encouragingly, our overall sales pipeline remains strong as our value proposition in the market remains differentiated. Our sales cycle in dedicated is typically eighteen months from start to finish, and our pipeline includes both large and small fleets at various stages of completion, all underwritten to our return targets. Overall, I remain pleased with the momentum and activity in the pipeline.

As I just mentioned and as we have communicated over the past eighteen months, we have had visibility to fleet losses that wrapped up in early July, which negatively impacted our third quarter ’25 truck count by about 85 trucks versus our second quarter results. Navigating through these losses, in addition to call outs we’ve had related to some customer bankruptcies and the overall market dynamics, demonstrates our discipline and strong execution. While we were losing locations that had historically delivered mature margins, we were simultaneously absorbing startup costs from onboarding new business. Despite facing these two margin pressures, we still maintain double-digit margins during this period. I am extremely proud of all of our teams for their effort.

Hope going forward, knowing that most of our fleet losses are behind us, is that we are back on track with our net fleet growth plan moving forward. We believe the performance of our dedicated business has been a standout not only for our company but also the industry. We have great visibility into the financial performance of each account, which provides a high level of accountability at each location and a diversified customer base with our managers on-site with our customers, which we believe creates unique value that is a differentiator for us. Going forward, with our known losses behind us, our expectation for modest fleet growth in 2025 has not changed.

As we have said previously, when we sell new truck deals, and that business starts up, we do incur some expenses as that business is onboarded. That said, this isn’t new for us. We are starting up new customer locations each quarter. Given our progress with respect to lowering our cost to serve, we expect our 2025 operating income to be approximately flat compared to 2024. The magnitude of any potential variance higher or lower to this outlook will be driven by the number of locations we start up during the quarter. We believe the setup is favorable for us to continue our growth trajectory in 2026 and beyond.

Our business model and value proposition are differentiated in the market and continue to attract new customers. We remain confident in our ability to compound our growth over many years to further penetrate our large addressable market. With that, I’d like to turn it over to Darren.

Darren Field: Thank you, Brad. Thank you to everyone for joining us this afternoon. I’d like to start by saying I feel really good about our performance and how our strategy and solid execution drove meaningful improvements in our results. I believe this is a true testament to our focus on operational excellence, cost discipline, and progress on lowering our cost serve initiative. Before we get into more detail on the results, I want to follow up on some of Shelley’s comments regarding the potential for Class I rail consolidation. First, there are still a lot of unknowns. But I am confident J.B.

Hunt Transport Services, Inc. should be a primary consideration and actively engaged in all discussions involving the future of the intermodal industry as well as the execution of all Class one’s desire to take share from the highway to grow their intermodal service offering. We have offered seamless transcontinental intermodal services for decades, connecting BNSF with both Eastern railroads, and believe that opportunity could exist well into the future regardless of the various outcomes we know are either announced or speculated in the market.

We continue to see a large opportunity to convert highway shipments to intermodal, and if the motivation for consolidation is to compete more with trucks, we believe this will present our industry-leading intermodal franchise additional growth opportunities. We are one of the largest purchasers of rail capacity in North America, and we will engage in discussions with all rail providers to execute on a strategy and plan that we think is in the best interest of our shareholders. Turning to the quarter, demand for our domestic intermodal service wasn’t all that strong, but nonetheless, we saw sequential improvement in volumes and executed some of the most efficient dray service in our history, particularly in September.

As Spencer mentioned, we still expect the peak season as lots of volume that moved on the water earlier this year will still need to advance in the inland supply chain ahead of the holidays. Volumes in the quarter were down 1% year over year and by month were down 3% in July, down 2% in August, and flat in September. After seeing unique strength off the West Coast last year due to the threat of the East Coast port labor disruption, TransCon volumes were down percent in the quarter, while Eastern loads were up 6%.

As we’ve communicated all year, we had a bid season strategy focused on getting better balance in our network to grow volumes and repair our margins with more price, particularly in our headhaul lanes. Last quarter, we talked about our success in the bid season, particularly around balance, and we think that success combined with our lowering our cost to serve initiatives were key contributors to our year-over-year and sequential performance improvement. Our service performance remains strong. Our primary rail providers BNSF, NS, and CSX continue to deliver excellent service, which we believe is taking share from Highway. I am confident our service offering is being recognized in the market.

Customers are reengaging with us with additional opportunities largely driven by our differentiated service and value compared to both highway and IMCs. As you all are keenly aware, we have the capacity and ability to execute on a meaningful growth plan over the coming years based on investments we’ve already made. In closing, we remain very confident in our intermodal franchise and the value we provide for our customers. We have shown the ability to grow and generate strong returns through many rail consolidation events over the past few decades and look forward to the opportunities we have in front of us. With that, I’d like to turn it back to the operator to open the call for questions.

Operator: Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. The first question comes from Chris Wetherbee with Wells Fargo. Please go ahead.

Chris Wetherbee: Hey, thanks. Good afternoon, guys. Hey, good afternoon. I guess maybe if we could start on the cost side and maybe unpack, I think you said $20 million in the quarter, I think $100 million is the total program. Can you give us a little sense maybe by segment how that played out? Any examples that you can provide in terms of detail would be great too. And then I guess as you think forward, is it sort of progressive from the 20 to the 100 over the several quarters? Any sort of insight there? And I guess in that context, boxes were down sequentially for the first time in quite some time.

So just kind of curious how that is sort of part of the plan if it is?

Brad Delco: Chris, I’ll try to address the first part and I’ll pass it over to Darren to address the second part. Really there’s progress across all areas of the business. And so when we think about, as we laid out last quarter, what are the three buckets that we were targeting for this initiative? It was around efficiency and productivity. That’s not just in the business, that’s also in back office and how all that gets allocated to businesses. Driving better asset utilization, I mean, saw that in intermodal. We certainly saw that and you heard some comments about almost record performance in our tractor utilization in our dray operations. You saw good improvement in productivity in Dedicated.

I wouldn’t want to say one segment versus the other, but I think you’ve seen it in the results across the board. In terms of how we’re going to progress going forward, I said in my comments, we’re going to give you an update each quarter. We said we think most of this will reveal itself next year. Listen, we’re off to a good start. We wanted to share that and I think you see it in the results. And while we do speak to it and we will speak to it each quarter, really the intent here is for you guys to see it in the results.

And I’m glad that you guys can see it in the results we printed this afternoon. So I’m going to pass it over to Darren and let him address maybe the container count question and appreciate the question, Chris.

Darren Field: Yes. I mean, the container count isn’t down. We have equipment that reaches useful life every quarter. It’s a small amount. Sometimes there’s a repair bill that may be greater than what the book value of that piece of equipment is, and we’ll retire it. The other component is we’ve worked closely with Dedicated in a few examples where we found what had been leased trailers in an account, we were able to use containers instead. It’s a pretty small number, but those would be the kind of moving pieces there. Nothing significant in terms of a real change in direction on container equipment.

Operator: The next question comes from Brian Ossenbeck with JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Brian Ossenbeck: Hey, good evening. Thanks for taking the question. I think Mike was giving some commentary about pricing for next year. I think it was in ICS low to mid-single. So hoping you can kind of run through what you’re expecting across the different modes. And if I’m hearing you correctly, lowering the cost to serve, if rates do stay flat or don’t move a whole lot for next year, it sounds like the structural reductions here mean that the performance like this can be more durable and perhaps even better whenever we do get to that long-awaited upcycle? Thank you.

Nick Hobbs: Yes. Thank you. I was really talking about what we’ve seen in recent bids and the awards that we’ve seen, not really what we thought next year was going to be on rates. But we’ve seen in ICS in particular, we’ve seen some success and growth in the amount of loads and in our pricing as we kind of focus on the more difficult challenging business that’s not as commoditized, and so I think you see that in our gross margin. So it’s just the type of business that we’re working on that we saw that.

And then Brian, to the second part of your question, I mean, clearly, the rate environment has been challenged now for quite some time for our industry. This initiative, again, that we launched, you really dig in on the deep into all the details, we have a spreadsheet that has over 100 lines of things that we’re going to attack. And we’ve had very healthy debates around our executive table about what’s structural, what’s temporary, what we think are just cost avoidance versus are things that we’re removing. And the numbers we’re sharing, I mean, I think we said last quarter, our goal is and what we’ve identified as something far greater than $100 million.

We’ve always been, I believe we’ve always been a fairly conservative company. We have a very strong say-do culture. If we say something, we’re really setting out to do it. And so we’re comfortable sharing the $100 million. Again, we’re off to a good start. Our hope is while we’ve had tremendous headwinds in this industry, at some point headwinds will turn to tailwinds. And I think it will make it, it’ll make the work we’re doing look even stronger. Again, in my comments, you heard us say, we really are trying to set this business up to drive stronger incrementals when the market is more in our favor.

And I think some of the discipline we have around cost is setting us up very nicely for that.

Operator: The next question comes from Jonathan Chappell with Evercore ISI. Please go ahead.

Jonathan Chappell: Thank you. Good afternoon. Don’t know who wants to answer this, maybe Darren or Spencer or even Brad, but you’ve talked about the demand challenges. We all know about that. Pricing in the spot market doesn’t seem to have done very much from three months ago either. But if you look at revenue per load in both intermodal and you had a pretty nice sequential improvement. So I’m trying to understand is that a decision you have to make versus volume, volume versus pricing? Is that a mix situation? Is that surcharges? And is that now the starting point? You always talk about like the cake being baked into the next year.

Given that sequential increase down to 3Q, is this the starting point of which the cake is baked? Or is there a risk that could actually move backward closer to the 2Q levels?

Darren Field: Okay. This is Darren. I’ll try to tackle at least part of that. If Spencer has anything to add, he can certainly jump in. So we’ve often talked about we implement about 30% of prices in the first quarter, thirty percent second quarter, 30% third quarter, and call it 10% in the fourth quarter. I have long said the third quarter is the best time to see the results of the previous bid cycle. And I think that’s what we did just show in terms of the results is that’s a fully implemented bid season. What is washed in the results is there is some good pricing movement in the headhauls. There is some negative pricing in backhauls.

And when you combine them, it looks relatively muted in terms of price per load. We reported minus 1%. And so I don’t know that the sequential change did that come from some sort of a mix shift? It could have probably has some element of mix in there. I would say while our transcon volumes weren’t up year over year, I do believe our transcon volumes were up sequentially. And so that can play a role in terms of what happens sequentially from a revenue per load position.

Nick Hobbs: Yes. And Jonathan, this is Nick. I’ll talk about ICS. I would just say it’s really mix in ours and type of business from just think about team or hazmat, just various different things that we’re going after. It’s a little bit more difficult, multi-stop. So those carry a little higher rate. So it’s the type of business that we’re targeting in ICS.

Operator: The next question comes from Scott Group with Wolfe Research. Please go ahead.

Scott Group: Hey, thanks. Afternoon. So I want to follow-up maybe similar to that last question. So obviously, very good sequential margin improvement from Q2 to Q3 in intermodal. Like how much of that do you think is the cost side of what you’re talking about versus the yield side? I know we had earlier peak season surcharges this year. Ultimately, I’m trying to just figure out like the sustainability of this and as costs continue to ramp, should we be expecting further sort of sequential improvement off of this trough?

Q2 to Q3, further improvement in Q3 to Q4, or is it not necessarily going to play out that way given some of the puts and takes with timing of peak surcharges and things like that?

Darren Field: Well, clearly, peak season surcharges got a lot of press. We went early because a lot of customers had believed that they needed extra capacity. I wouldn’t say that the third quarter was a particularly strong peak season surcharge quarter. Frankly, we were disappointed in demand off the West Coast during the quarter and even adjusted our peak program in the middle of the quarter as an example. So I wouldn’t want our analysts to believe that’s driven largely by peak season charges. Really when we set out with our bid strategy a year ago, we wanted to grow clearly. We wanted to improve price and we wanted to improve balance.

And the improvement in balance, whether that be from growth westbound or an improvement in some price eastbound in the headhauls. I mean, of that result is driving improvements that we feel confident we can continue to sustain as we move forward. The cost side, we did, we were able to implement some small technology enhancements during the summer that really began at the end of the second quarter that helped define for our entire operations planning team some new flexibility that our customers had given us in some cases. And from that, we were able to drive real efficiency in our driver base. We were able to drive out some empty miles on the drayage system.

So these are areas that we feel are sustainable. And as we continue to look for opportunities to grow, what I don’t want anyone to hear is that growing in imbalanced lanes is a bad thing. It doesn’t have to be bad. It just ultimately the pricing on those loads has to cover the cost of positioning empties. And in a lot of cases, I think our customers are beginning to look hard at their supply chains, what’s happening with them, and can we look into the future and find a way to get back growing in markets that maybe are in balance that doesn’t have to be a bad thing for us.

But I believe the cost improvements that we made during the quarter, we must sustain those moving forward.

Operator: The next question comes from Brady Lares with Stephens. Please go ahead.

Brady Lares: Hey, great. Thanks. I wanted to touch on DCS for just a moment. Sales have continued to be pretty strong over the last few quarters despite trade uncertainty and a tough freight backdrop. Can you talk about what’s driving these wins at this point? Four years into a freight recession? And despite the strength in sales, you mentioned in your prepared remarks, you saw a pretty meaningful improvement in margins. Can you think of help us think about how much of that was just an improvement in your cost to serve versus kind of a maturation of these earlier sales?

Brad Hicks: Yes. Thanks, Brady. This is Brad. First, let me say just how remarkably proud I am of our entire team in DCS. The effort, the service, our drivers, maintenance teams, all the support personnel, our operators, just fantastic results in the quarter, both from an execution standpoint, from a safety standpoint, and certainly from a value creation and value delivery to our customers. And I think that the reason I say that is, I think that is one of the differentiations for J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. is really our CVD program, customer value delivery.

And so when I think about the value that we can create for our customers, both through creative solutions, but also just our density and our ability to leverage and share our resources across multiple customers and multiple business types to really drive and create valuable solutions. The second part of that is, yes, we have worked hard and similar to Darren, there’s a variety of initiatives that we’ve kicked off. Some earlier in the year, some more recent. There’s been great work done by our maintenance teams helping lower our cost to serve, both by creating more uptime for our equipment and also lowering the cost of the actual maintenance program that we have.

And then lastly, risk is a critical component of private fleet, and the environment we’re in and what insurance has done the last several years that we’ve talked about often. And we’re doing a fantastic job there, as Shelley mentioned and Nick did as well in the prepared comments. And so can’t really say it’s one thing. It’s all those things together that makes our program different, we believe. And I think that’s why we’ve continued to have success even though the backdrop of this market has been pretty terrible as we all know.

Operator: The next question comes from Ken Hoexter with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Ken Hoexter: Great. Good afternoon. Nick, you mentioned kind of seeing signs of impacts of ELP and the P1 visas. Is that what’s driving kind of spot rates up the last few weeks? Is that capacity removal already being seen in the market? Not the demand side, but the supply side? And then Shelley or Darren, I think you mentioned about the state of the potential rail mergers, but have you had conversations with UNP or Norfolk on sustaining your access or anything? Is that a discussion you’ve had at this point? Ahead of their filing?

Nick Hobbs: Yes. Well, Ken, I’ll start with one and let Darren get over to question two here in a second. So question one, yes, that’s the reason you’ve seen spot rates up in the last couple of weeks. It’s been because of enforcement activity and when you see the pockets, I would say it’s been able to cover freight, it’s just tightened it up and so we’ve seen a little tightness in probably eight to 10 markets and I think you can kind of follow the news around and see where ICE is active and in big metropolitan areas. And so it’s a combination of non-domicile. It’s also some cabotage. It’s also some fear factors.

But we’re prepared for that for whatever happens. We’re set up with intermodal, dedicated, our brokerage, just like when we went through COVID. We will be able to get the capacity no matter what happens in the market. So but we are seeing it in some spots, just a little notice, nothing extreme.

Darren Field: And for your second question there, Ken, clearly got two questions in there, very different subject. I don’t know how that slipped by the new IR guy. So I’m not going to talk through any kind of rail conversations. I think it is important that all of our shareholders and all of our customers hear any future merger that would be approved for whatever reason has been perceived that J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. would have to move our traffic to CSX. And that’s not accurate at all. There’s nothing about a future state new railroad that would mean our current Norfolk Southern footprint that we have today would be required to change.

I think we referenced that we would intend to speak to all of the railroads to make sure that we can solve for our customers’ networks and continue to be what we’ve been to the market for decades now. And that’s just drive home the ability to take a customer’s needs, translate that into what the railroad capacity and capabilities are, combine it with our world-class drayage system, and provide intermodal solutions for those customers using the best solution available. And that will be our approach for as long as I’m here.

Operator: The next question comes from Jordan Alliger with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Jordan Alliger: Yes, hi. So given sort of the color and commentary on customers still expect peak season and load still to advance inland against the pull forward, is there any way you could sort of put that together a little bit and think through sort of loads and volumes for you guys relative to what we just saw in the third quarter as we look out the next quarter or so? Just from a high-level perspective, thanks.

Spencer Frazier: Yes. Hey, John, this is Spencer. Thanks for the question. The main point that I really wanted to make there, there’s been quite a few headlines that come out and say, hey, peak is over. There’s not going to be a peak. And I totally agree with that from an ocean perspective. But we always have to remember that domestic, that inland supply chain, the timing of that is really driven by actual consumer and customer demand. And that’s going to take place at the same time it does every year, associated with the holidays. So that was kind of point number one. And then back to our customers are expecting a peak season.

I think even the NRS came out with their retail sales number or retail sales for September being up 5.7%. Our customers are working to keep their consumers, to keep all of us engaged and make sure that they can hit their sales targets and goals for the holiday season. And that they’re expecting to do that. Now for us, definitely the deals and agreements and support that we have for our customers is unique. And each one of our customers is unique on how they’re executing their peak volume.

But the big thing when you think about going forward to your question, you look at last year, last year was artificially inflated due to the East Coast strike concerns and other issues. And that really started in the ‘4. And carried through to really where West Coast port volumes were up 20% significantly all the way through the year. I expect the comps associated with that change and really the current import volumes to really be challenged all the way through March ‘6. So I think that where we’re at today and what we’ve done and what we’re going to do to help our customers through peak, we’re looking forward to doing that.

And working with those customers that have provided us with the forecast and what their needs are.

Operator: The next question comes from Ravi Shanker with Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Ravi Shanker: Great, thanks. I’m going to throw in a long-term question here and maybe sharing this topic close to your heart. Just kind of given you guys probably led peers on JV360 and all the tech investments kind of many years ago, can you talk about kind of what you guys are working on right now? What that technology capital envelope looks like? Key initiatives there and kind of how the ICS business would look like from a tech and automation perspective maybe three, four years from now? Thank you.

Shelley Simpson: Thank you, Ravi. And love to talk about technology. Our strategy is rooted in how we transform our logistics. We want to be smarter, more predictive, and automated through JBM360. And if you just think about what our platform does, it supports $2 billion in carrier freight transactions, and that gives us scale to innovate. And we could do that quickly and effectively. As I think about what we’re working on, we’ve deployed 50 AI agents. That’s across the business. We’re trying to automate tasks, streamline our operations. And maybe just a few examples. Today, 60% of our third-party care check calls, those are automated.

More than 73% of our orders are auto accepted, 80% of our paper invoices are paid without a manual touch. Our dynamic quote API responds to 2 million quotes a year. And we’ve automated about 100,000 or a little more than one hundred thousand hours annually across our highway, dedicated, and CE teams. And so it’s not just about AI for us, it is about how we think about technology, but how does it empower our people. And so whether that’s engineering better processes or using robotic automation, leveraging AI, we’re focused on helping our teams work smarter and become more efficient. And that’s going to improve our operational performance and enhance our customers’ visibility and their experience.

So as we continue to refine our technology strategy, our goal remains very clear to us. We’re going to deliver measurable gains in cost savings, we’re going to increase our customer satisfaction, and we want to gain market share as a result. Now as I think about ICS, they have a great opportunity to do even more work when it comes to automation because the nature of the new customers they’re onboarding are less sophisticated from a technology perspective. So it’s really a new for them. If you think about our overall company, our company and the percentage of customers that we have that are large shippers, we’re heavily distorted to.

And so I would say that’s our opportunity to really grow with those small to midsized customers and that’s where automation will help significantly. We’ve got a clear path of things that we’re working on. And then I want to make sure that I do mention we did talk about Up Labs, which is a company that we’ve partnered with and really having them attack two of our areas that we believe need rewritten from a process and even more importantly technology where they’re integrating AI into those processes. Those two areas I would say, we’re in the middle of, really investigating and determining next path forward. But for us, all of this is about efficiency across our entire system.

And so that’s part of our lowering our cost to serve. It’s part of our transformation work. And I don’t think it just has to be AI that makes that happen. It could be a combination of processes, robotics, and AI.

Operator: The next question comes from Bascome Majors with SIG. Please go ahead.

Bascome Majors: Brad, as you get into the planning period for next year, can you talk a little bit about some of the higher visibility big-ticket cost items in the budget, be it health and welfare or insurance? Just what is the inflationary backdrop you’re continuing with now? And how do you think shifts into next year? And you put it on the blender with the $50 million plus incremental cost savings, how much do you really need to get from pricing and growth to offset that? Thank you.

Brad Delco: Well, Bascome, the way you started with that question, I was just going to say yes, yes, yes, and yes. I would say the big areas where we’re seeing inflationary pressure always on our people and wages but in particular around benefits. Group medical healthcare costs are, I don’t think it’s unique to J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. I think it’s a challenge for any and all businesses. So that’s certainly an area that I think is a hot topic as we’re thinking about planning for 2026. Insurance, yes, we’re in the renewal process now. It’s probably too early to comment on that.

But particularly as you get into certain layers or areas of coverage, we’re seeing greater cost and largely because of how and how these claims are settling. And I think it’s again, it’s not that’s not unique to J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. The thing that I’m really proud of is, and you heard Shelley and Nick both talk to it and our whole company should be proud of, is our safety performance. I mean, we’re coming off of a very strong year last year, which was best, which bested the prior year.

And year to date, I’ll knock on wood here, our performance is better than last year and the best way to reduce our cost on claims and insurance items is to really to avoid any incidents. And so that’s the goal. The goal is zero and we got a long ways to go to get there. In terms of what do we need, our customers I know are going to push hard unless there is a meaningful change or a change in the supply-demand balance. I think Nick alluded to the fact that there are maybe some things that are starting to pop up that might be reasons for more concern about what the capacity situation looks like going forward.

But we got to at least get above inflation. And if inflation is running 3%, I feel like our industry needs something better than that to get into a healthier spot. And our industry is not in a healthy spot. And I think most of you who have covered this for a long time know that. So our goal and we had a lot of follow-up conversations after our last earnings call about is $100 million net or gross, and I jokingly will say this here, I’ve asked each of those investors to define it for me and they all gave me a different example.

At the end of the day, lowering our cost to serve of $100 million, we want that to show up and be very visible to our owners. And we want to be obviously visible to you as well. But I would say we need something mid-single digits next year for our to at least get back on a healthier path to margin recovery and particularly for some of these transportation providers to reinvest or be at reinvestable levels. So that’s a long answer. I know I didn’t answer it specifically because I don’t want to give guidance as to what our rate expectations might be next year.

But I would hope the value that we’re providing customers will allow us to earn an appropriate return on the investments and the risk we’re taking serving those customers.

Operator: The next question comes from Tom Wadewitz with UBS. Please go ahead.

Tom Wadewitz: Yes, good afternoon. Want to give Shelley a shot at a question here if she wants to take it or I guess could pass along certainly. But when I think about coming out of a downturn in the industry, it seems like there we look for kind of a catalyst to change the shipper mindset. And I know you’ve got tons of experience working with shippers over time. So do you think this the DOT efforts that you listed a number of them, I think there’s a lot of focus on the non-domiciled CDL issue right now. But do you think that those DOT efforts are really causing a lot of concern in the mindset?

And there’s potentially a shift in that mindset that seems important to pricing. And then I guess within that is the 200,000 number DOT talked about, is that you think that sounds right? Or does that not sound right? Thank you.

Shelley Simpson: Yes. Thank you, Tom. And let me start and I’ll have the team kind of jump in here. Overall. When I think about how our shippers are viewing the market, it has been a surprise to all of us. So to J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Inc. and our shippers, how this market still is in the same place it’s been over the more than three years. And so I would tell you, our customers a year ago they were prepared and understood the why. That we would need more price.

It’s not that our customers are unsympathetic to our position, but they’re managing their costs based on what they see from a bid perspective and what they see from a cost perspective. And so, I think it’s incumbent on us. One of the things I think is important is we are a growth company, but we’re a disciplined growth company. We can’t just grow. We have to be disciplined in our growth strategy. And making sure we articulate that.

I’ll tell you this Tom, as much as Darren’s talked about our pricing change, although that might seem really simple to do, in this environment, those were very difficult discussions, but they were really fueled by our operational excellence and being able to talk to our customers about what great work we’re doing and they saw value in that. I’ve not seen us have to fight so hard for 12% before. When you know inflation is so much more than that overall. So I would tell you, I think customers want to help us. We need the market to change in order to do that. Do I think that non-domicile CDL could be a catalyst? Sure.

It would at least make a little more sense to me why there’s so much capacity in the market versus just our statistics say today. But I would tell you things have to change from here. If that’s one of the things that happens, then does that happen in the next twelve months? Does that take twenty-four months for it to happen? But let me just take a pause there and let Nick maybe you want to jump in on the non-doms.

Nick Hobbs: No, yes. And I might just add a couple of quick things here, Shelley. I totally agree. Our customers really the last two years have been planning for changes in cost that really didn’t materialize because they didn’t have to. I think some of the things that we’re seeing right now with a little bit of a disconnect in spot price rates going up versus volumes going down, the first time we’ve seen that. Maybe in the history of some of the data. Our customers look at macro data and spot pricing and volumes. Let me go back to until they actually experience it or feel it at the dock level, until freight is not picked up.

They won’t make a meaningful change. So that’s the area where we’ve got to give them confidence and predictability of our capacity and service, which we’ve done through operational excellence. That as this thing does change, whether it’s near term or over time, they can count on us to take care of their business. Nick?

Nick Hobbs: I’ll just add a couple of things. On the non-dom, I think the $200,000 is fairly legit. But I think there’s a lot of other factors of drivers that’s coming across the border, call it, cabotage. It should only be in the border zone. Is some good data out there. From a couple of sources that’s come out recently to talk about that. And so I just think there’s other factors that’s going to continue to impact that. But really to see any impact in the speed, it’s going to take the economic side along with the regulation side and that’s what’s going to drive the timing is those two. In my opinion.

Operator: The last question comes from Brandon Oglenski with Barclays. Please go ahead.

Eric Morgan: Hey, good afternoon. This is Eric Morgan on for Brandon actually. Thanks for taking the question. Just a quick one on intermodal growth in the East. I think you referenced in the prepared remarks having the labor port issue kind of playing in there. So I’m just wondering how sustainable that level of growth is moving forward and maybe in the context of some of this different seasonality you’re seeing this year would be helpful. Thanks.

Darren Field: Sure. So I think in reference to the labor situation, that had more to do with last year’s comps on the West Coast. Volumes being strong. Our Eastern network volume really doesn’t have a lot of interaction with the import economy a ton. I think that the Eastern network continues to be where we see the best highway to rail conversion opportunity. Our East network also includes Mexico as an example. And so we have really nice solid growth coming northbound out of Mexico as part of that. We think that the vast majority of the millions of loads that remain to be converted from highway to intermodal are in the East.

So we’re encouraged by our growth in the East, and we expect and anticipate we can continue to grow in the East for years to come.

Operator: This concludes the question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mrs. Shelley Simpson for any closing remarks. Please go ahead.

Shelley Simpson: Hey, thanks everyone for joining. Hey, we’re pleased with our results in the short term, especially considering this environment. But we have more work to do and we’re not satisfied. We’re going to continue to remain focused on our priorities of operational excellence in both service and safety. We’re going to scale into our investments through disciplined growth, and then we’re going to keep repairing our margins, and that will drive stronger financial performance. We’re a growth company. It’s important, and we have the highest service across all five of our business units. I think the highest since I’ve been with the company from a consistency across the segments.

We see that metric as a key enabler to execute on our strategy and maintain our say-do culture on delivering what we say and what we expect from ourselves. Thanks for your interest, and we’ll see you next quarter.

Operator: The conference is now concluded. Thank you for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect.

Source link

Here’s the Average American’s Car Insurance Premium. How Do You Compare?

According to Experian data, the average American driver pays roughly $2,328 per year for full coverage auto insurance in 2025. If you carry only the minimum coverage required by your state, that drops to about $1,546 annually.

Of course, those are just averages. Your actual rate might be far higher or much lower. It all depends on personal factors, like where you live, what kind of car you drive, and your claims history.

So how do you stack up?

My personal rate

For example, my current full-coverage policy runs about $1,047 a year here in California. I’ve got a clean driving record, great credit, a family minivan (yep, full dad mode), and I only rack up around 6,000 miles a year.

I pay less than half the national average — but it didn’t happen by luck. I make it a habit to compare quotes every so often and keep my profile in top shape.

If you haven’t checked your rates lately, it’s worth a look. Here’s a free tool to compare rates from the top insurance companies.

What impacts your premium

Insurance companies use dozens of factors to gauge your risk and determine your policy rate.

Some of these factors you can control, others not so much.

Here are the biggest ones that matter:

  • Location: Rates differ wildly by state and even ZIP code. Drivers in Maryland, for instance, might pay more than double what drivers in Vermont do.
  • Driving record: Tickets, accidents, and DUIs can raise your rate for years.
  • Vehicle type: Minivans and sedans generally cost less to insure than luxury or sports cars.
  • Credit score: In most states, a higher credit score can help lower your premium.
  • Annual mileage: Driving less typically means less risk — and lower rates.
  • Coverage level: Full coverage offers stronger protection but costs more.
  • Deductible: Choosing a higher deductible can reduce your monthly premium.

Knowing which levers you can pull gives you real control over your rate.

Why it pays to compare

Every year, your car gets a little older, your driving record gets a little longer, and your situation changes. Maybe you’re driving less, moved somewhere safer, or finished paying off your car.

Meanwhile, most insurance companies raise your rate each renewal — even if nothing about your risk has changed. It’s just how the system works.

That’s why checking rates once a year can pay off big.

In fact, Consumer Reports found that nearly 1 in 3 drivers switched auto insurers in the past five years. And those who did saved an average of $461 a year.

Since it only takes a few minutes to shop around, it’s always worth checking if better rates are available out there.

Personally, I like to check insurance prices once a year. Most of the time, I find I’m already getting the best deal. But every so often, I stumble across a lower rate for the exact same coverage!

Bottom line: Don’t wait for your renewal date. Check out this free tool to compare rates from the top insurance companies. It only takes a few minutes, and you could save hundreds!

Source link

I Haven’t Had a Car Payment in 10 Years — Here’s Where That Money Went Instead

I haven’t had a car payment in a decade.

No lease, no financing, no $749 a month disappearing into a lender’s account. Just my old 2007 Honda Element, still rumbling down the road. She’s not the prettiest girl at the bar anymore, but she’s all I need.

At some point, I realized every “small” car payment my friends were making could have been a serious savings engine.

The power of redirecting that $749 a month

The average new car payment today is a jaw-dropping $749 a month. Skip that for 10 years, and you’ve kept nearly $90,000 in your pocket before even earning a cent in interest.

But that money doesn’t have to sit idle. Over the past few years, the first place I’ve been putting what would’ve been my “car payment” is straight into a high-yield savings account. At around 4.50% APY, that’s earned me thousands in interest while staying completely risk-free.

While I don’t want to keep all of my money in an HYSA, I keep my emergency fund with a few months of living expenses there and just make sure it’s always topped off. Beyond that, everything flows into my favorite tax-advantaged retirement accounts.

Why I park my money in a high-yield savings account

I treat my HYSA like a first stop for the money I used to waste on car payments. It’s my emergency and peace-of-mind fund, and here’s what makes high-yield savings accounts so easy to love:

  • Safe and FDIC-insured up to $250,000
  • Instant access when you need your cash
  • Rates still around 4.00%, even as the Fed starts cutting

You can compare today’s top high-yield savings accounts here and find one that’s actually worth your money.

What you could do instead of sending money to a bank

Once I saw how quickly my savings grew, I realized it was really about peace of mind. I never worry about an unexpected bill or repair anymore. My high-yield savings account is my safety net, and every month I go without a car payment, that net gets stronger.

If you want that same feeling, start by opening a high-yield savings account that actually rewards you for saving. Rates around 4.00% APY won’t last forever, but getting started now could give you years of financial breathing room.

Source link

Want to Invest in Quantum Computing? 5 Stocks That Are Great Buys Right Now

Quantum computing is quickly becoming the hottest sector in the market.

Quantum computing investing is not an easy field to pick stocks in. There’s a lot of complex knowledge needed to understand the technology, making it hard for investors to discern which company is currently leading the way. Furthermore, the space is rapidly shifting, with new announcements occurring every week that change the landscape.

This makes it difficult to be a quantum computing investor, but I think there is a way to spread out the risk a bit and still have exposure to this important and emerging space. By taking a basket approach and picking a few stocks, investors can increase their odds of success by sacrificing maximum return for a better chance of success. I think this is the best way to approach quantum computing, and I’ve got five picks that help make up a quantum computing basket.

Image of a quantum computing cell.

Image source: Getty Images.

Quantum computing pure plays

First, let’s look at some pure plays in this space. These companies are the most exciting, as they’re relatively small but have the chance to turn into giant tech companies if their technology is successful.

First is IonQ (IONQ -5.85%). It was the first quantum computing pure play company to go public, and has seen tremendous success over the past year. It’s taking a unique approach to the quantum computing realm, utilizing a trapped-ion technology versus the more popular superconducting option.

A trapped-ion quantum computer is inherently more accurate, but trades off processing speed. Still, with quantum computing accuracy being the biggest problem surrounding widespread commercial adoption, investing in a company whose technology is a leader in solving this problem is a wise idea.

Next is Rigetti Computing (RGTI 0.39%). Rigetti is deploying the superconducting quantum computing approach and has seen some recent successes with it. On Sept. 30, Rigetti announced the sale of two quantum computing systems that totaled $5.7 million.

While that’s not the billion-dollar enterprise many investors picture this technology having, it’s a start. Furthermore, because these customers likely explored other quantum computing options available, it’s a big deal that they decided to pick Rigetti over some others.

Last on the pure play list is D-Wave Quantum (QBTS 4.13%). D-Wave Quantum is taking a completely different approach to quantum computing than IonQ or Rigetti. It’s developing a quantum annealing computer, which can’t be used for general-purpose computing like the other two options. Instead, quantum annealing focuses on solving optimization problems, which is incredibly useful for weather patterns, logistics networks, and artificial intelligence (AI) training.

If D-Wave can develop a winning option with this approach, it could dominate the fields that are recognized as having the most value for quantum computing.

Legacy tech players

Next are some legacy tech players competing in the quantum computing space. While these options don’t have nearly the upside of the pure plays, they’re also less risky. If IonQ, D-Wave, or Rigetti fail to produce a commercially viable product, it’s likely that their stock will go to zero. For Alphabet (GOOG 2.17%) (GOOGL 2.23%) and Nvidia (NVDA -0.17%), they have other primary businesses that will ensure their viability for years to come.

Alphabet is seen as a leader in quantum computing from the big tech standpoint. It’s developing quantum computing for internal use, but also to be rented out via its cloud computing service, Google Cloud. If Alphabet can develop its own quantum computer in-house, it can increase its margins in this area, as it won’t have to pay for other companies’ profits, as it does when it buys Nvidia’s graphics processing units (GPUs) now. Alphabet has resources that the pure play companies can only dream about, and in a trend that needs heavy capital influx to develop the product, Alphabet could be a huge winner.

Last is Nvidia. Nvidia currently produces the most powerful classical computing units available, and has no plans to develop a quantum computing option. However, Nvidia sees that the real value in quantum computing will be a hybrid approach that uses its GPUs alongside a quantum computing unit. To ensure its hardware is used in this hybrid approach, Nvidia is evolving its leading software, CUDA, for quantum computing, renaming it CUDA-Q.

CUDA software is a primary reason why Nvidia has been so successful in the AI arms race so far, and by offering a quantum computing alternative, it will ensure that its computing products will be used for years to come, even if quantum computing takes the world by storm.

Keithen Drury has positions in Alphabet and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet and Nvidia. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Feeling the strain: Italian pasta makers reach boiling point over Trump tariffs

Published on
16/10/2025 – 11:19 GMT+2


ADVERTISEMENT

In the global trade storm unleashed since US President Donald Trump’s return to power, Italian pasta producers are feeling very much alone — while their case is a special one.

On 4 September, the US Department of Commerce announced preliminary tariffs of 91.74% on 13 pasta brands.

If upheld, the tariffs would take effect in January 2026, delivering a significant blow to Italy, which exported nearly €700 million worth of pasta to the United States in 2024.

Admittedly, the case is not new. It originated in 1996, when US pasta producers accused Italian manufacturers of dumping — selling their products in the American market at prices lower than those in Italy.

Since then, Italian producers have been regularly subject to tariffs, but never of the magnitude now decided by the Trump administration.

Combined with the 15% duties that now apply to EU imports into the US, the total tariff burden would reach 106.74% if implemented. The pasta makers say this is brutal.

“It’s unfair, it’s a protectionist action of the US against Italian pasta,” Margherita Mastromauro, president of Unione Italiana Food, the largest association of food producers in Italy, told Euronews.

“We need help, because a large part of our companies are involved. With a duty so high, it means that all these companies will not export until the new review will be done.”

The investigation concerned the period between 1 July 2023 and 30 June 2024, Italian producers hope the review of the year 2025 will bring them some relief. But for now, the future remains uncertain.

Can the fight become political?

The companies have been scrambling to get these tariffs lifted since September.

Two of them, Garofalo and La Molisana, have taken legal action against the decision.

The Italian government and the European Commission have begun to get involved. However, room for manoeuvre remains limited in what is, according to the president of Unione Italiana Food, more a “legal” than a “political” matter.

The Italian Foreign Ministry has said the duties were “disproportionate” and has joined the case as an “interested party” to weigh in favour of this key sector of Italy’s economy.

On its side, the Commission told Euronews that the issue could be raised within the framework of the new dialogue initiated with the Trump administration on tariffs, since the agreement reached in July ended weeks of discord between the two sides of the Atlantic.

But an EU official also conceded that, unlike the unilateral tariffs imposed on other European products — which violate rules of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) — the US anti-dumping action against pasta appears to be done traditionally, as a trade defence mechanism allowed by the WTO, which regulates international trade between its member countries.

“We are closely monitoring the case, and if there are flaws in the investigation, we will question it and we will raise the issue with the WTO,” the official told Euronews.

If that were the case, it could lead to retaliatory measures from the EU.

Socialist Italian MEP Brando Benifei, who leads the parliamentary delegation for relations with the US, condemned the US action that he considers “clearly discriminatory”.

“This has to be solved and we urge the Commission to act through,” Benifei told Euronews.

Source link

Microsoft vs. Apple: What’s the Better Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stock to Buy Today?

Microsoft’s Copilot is already helping generate billions in revenue, while Apple is in the midst of enhancing its iPhones with new AI features.

Microsoft (MSFT -0.15%) and Apple (AAPL 0.54%) are forever rivals. They are competitors in the personal computer market and for years have been the leading tech companies in the world. Even today, their valuations are similar. As of Tuesday’s close, Microsoft had a slight edge in market cap ($3.82 trillion versus $3.67 trillion).

There’s a new arena that could be their new battleground: artificial intelligence (AI). It’s still the early innings of AI deployment, and how their businesses evolve and adapt to AI remains a big question mark. But based on where they are today, which AI stock looks to be the better buy right now?

A person's face partially obscured by numbers and images.

Image source: Getty Images.

Which company has the better overall growth prospects?

Both of these companies already have large, robust businesses that can benefit from AI. Apple is a big name in consumer electronics with its iPads and iPhones being highly coveted products and, in some cases, status symbols. Microsoft, meanwhile, has its core in the business world with companies all over using its office products and cloud software for their day-to-day operational needs. They also both sell personal computers, with Microsoft focusing more on practicality and real-world business use, while Apple’s focus has been on simplicity and ease of use for the average user.

They both have many opportunities where AI can enhance their existing products in services. But the edge for sheer growth potential has to go Microsoft, simply because of how much broader its business has become over the years, especially in gaming, with it wrapping up its massive $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard a couple of years ago.

Which company will benefit the most from AI?

AI has tremendous potential applications for these businesses. Many Apple users have been eagerly awaiting the launch of new AI-powered features for the company’s iPhones and were disappointed when they learned many of the key ones related to Siri will be pushed back until next year.

When that happens, however, that could trigger a flurry of upgrades and growth for the business. I don’t think a slow-and-steady approach will necessarily hurt Apple. In fact, it could end up being a smart move for the tech company by taking its time and ensuring everything is rolled out smoothly, to ensure that user privacy is well protected in the process.

Microsoft has already been enhancing its products and services with AI capabilities. However, there’s been plenty of debate about just how successful its Copilot AI really is. Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff has referred to it as “Clippy 2.0,” in reference to the frustrating assistant that Microsoft had years ago that users didn’t find all that helpful.

Apple deserves an edge when it comes to AI potential, simply for the massive wave of upgrades that could be coming if it hits it out of the park with its new iPhone features.

Which stock has the more attractive valuation?

It’s always important to consider valuation when buying a stock, as buying at a high price may impact your ability to earn a good return from your investment in the future. For a while, Microsoft’s stock was trading at more of a premium to Apple’s stock, but in recent weeks, that gap has evaporated.

MSFT PE Ratio Chart

Data by YCharts.

This one is easy to decide: It’s a tie. Their price-to-earnings multiples are almost identical at this stage. But it is notable to see that prior to the announcement of reciprocal tariffs in April, it was Apple that was trading at more of a premium than Microsoft, and then the trend reversed, with Apple’s exposure to manufacturing its iPhones in China likely weighing down the stock for part of the year.

Which stock should you buy?

The stock I’d buy today is Apple. It has devoted fans who will be willing to upgrade to the newest iPhone, even under challenging economic conditions, if it means access to cutting-edge features. Apple may be slow in rolling out AI, but when it does, the execution can be a lot cleaner, polished, and better for users in the end than if it were rushed.

Microsoft, meanwhile, has been quick to rush out AI features for its software. However, in an increasingly crowded market for AI services, it may have a more difficult time keeping customers happy when there may be other, and potentially better, options to choose from.

Apple, may, in the end, benefit from being a bit slower in its AI deployment.

David Jagielski has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple, Microsoft, and Salesforce. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Voya Boosts Bet on Bonds With $9.3 Million BND Buy

Bond ETF prices over time

Getty Images

On October 09, 2025, Voya Financial Advisors, Inc. disclosed the purchase of 126,532 shares of BND, estimated at $9.32 million based on the quarterly average price.

What happened

According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission dated October 09, 2025, Voya Financial Advisors, Inc. bought 126,532 additional shares of Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND -0.07%) during the quarter. The transaction was valued at $9,316,966. The fund now holds 1,935,848 shares in BND.

What else to know

The increased stake in BND brings the position to 13.89% of 13F AUM.

Top holdings after the filing:

  • VV (Vanguard Large-Cap ETF): $212,202,112 (20.5% of AUM)
  • BND (Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF): $144.03 million (13.9% of AUM)
  • VEU (Vanguard FTSE All-World ex-US ETF): $101.80 million (9.8% of AUM)
  • USIG (iShares Broad USD Investment Grade Corporate Bond ETF): $45,560,981 (4.4% of AUM)
  • SPTL (SPDR Portfolio Long term Treasury ETF): $45.52 million (4.4% of AUM)

As of October 8, 2025, shares were priced at $74.28, up 0.32% for the year; the one-year alpha versus the S&P 500 was -14.13 percentage points BND’s annualized dividend yield was 3.79% as of October 9, 2025

Company overview

Metric Value
AUM 374.4 B
Dividend Yield (TTM) 3.79%
Price (as of market close 2025-10-08) $74.28
1-Year Price Change 6.1%

Company snapshot

Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) is one of the largest fixed income ETFs, offering investors comprehensive access to the U.S. investment-grade bond market. The fund tracks a broad, investment-grade, taxable U.S. bond index and invests at least 80% of its assets in bonds included in the index.

Its portfolio is composed primarily of U.S. dollar-denominated bonds with maturities over one year, selected through a sampling process to closely match the index’s risk and return characteristics.

BND serves institutional and retail investors seeking broad, cost-efficient access to the U.S. fixed income market.

Foolish take

Vanguard Total Bond Market ETF (BND) continues to attract institutional interest as investors seek stability and income in an uncertain rate environment. The bond fund‘s broad reach across the U.S investment-grade bond market gives it unique appeal in times where equities are choppy amidst U.S China trade tensions and yields remains elevated.

BND’s offering spans over 11,000 securities, blending U.S Treasuries, corporates and mortgage backed bonds into one of the most diversified fixed income portfolios available. Its current yield near 3.8 offers steady income while maintaining credit quality and moderate duration risk. For Voya advisors, building exposure through a low-cost and transparent vehicle such as BND shows a deliberate focus on resilience and disciplined asset allocation. 

While short-term rate movements can influence bond prices, BND’s scale and efficient structure marks a dependable core holdings for both institutional and retail portfolios. As markets shift toward a lower-rate outlook, BND stands out as a practice way to capture broad bond exposure and steady total returns over time. 

Glossary

Assets Under Management (AUM): The total market value of assets a fund or investment manager oversees on behalf of clients.

13F: A quarterly report filed by institutional investment managers to disclose their equity holdings to the SEC.

Dividend Yield: The annual dividend income an investment pays, expressed as a percentage of its current price.

Alpha: A measure of an investment’s performance relative to a benchmark, indicating value added or subtracted by active management.

ETF (Exchange-Traded Fund): An investment fund traded on stock exchanges, holding a basket of assets like stocks or bonds.

Investment-Grade: Bonds rated as relatively low risk of default by credit rating agencies, typically BBB/Baa or higher.

Sampling Process: A portfolio construction method where a subset of securities is selected to closely match an index’s characteristics.

Mortgage-Backed Securities: Bonds secured by a pool of home mortgages, with payments passed to investors.

Asset-Backed Securities: Bonds backed by pools of financial assets, such as loans or receivables, other than mortgages.

TTM: The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.

Reportable Assets: Assets that must be disclosed in regulatory filings, such as those reported in a 13F filing.

Stake: The amount or percentage of ownership an investor holds in a particular security or fund.

Source link

3 Big Mistakes for Artificial Intelligence (AI) Growth Stock Investors to Avoid in 2026

These investing best practices are especially important as tensions heat up between the U.S. and China.

The Nasdaq Composite‘s brutal 3.6% sell-off on Oct. 10 was a painful reminder of how quickly growth stocks can sell off when doubt creeps in. Friday’s tumble marked the worst session since April during the height of trade tensions between the U.S. and China.

The sell-off was a reaction to the U.S. threatening an additional 100% tariff on Chinese imports as a retaliation for China’s stricter export controls on rare-earth minerals and magnets. These materials and products are used across economic sectors, including semiconductors and technological equipment with artificial intelligence (AI) applications.

On Oct. 12, reports indicated that China would not back down against escalated tariff threats from the U.S.

Investors often talk about buying opportunities when the market is selling off. But it can be just as helpful to be aware of potential mistakes and prevent them before they do damage to your portfolio. Here are three that apply to AI growth stock investors who are preparing for next year.

Light from a screen reflecting off an investor’s glasses.

Image source: Getty Images.

1. Having an overly concentrated AI portfolio

A common mistake is to overly focus on one facet of a value chain.

For example, an investor may own Nvidia (NVDA -0.17%), Broadcom, and Advanced Micro Devices as a way to diversify across different AI chip designers. The issue is that many of these companies have the same customers. For example, OpenAI is buying chips from all three companies to build out 10 gigawatts of data centers. If OpenAI were to cut its spending, it could affect the earnings of all three companies.

Similarly, equipment suppliers like Applied Materials, Lam Research, and ASML all share the same largest customers — which are semiconductor manufacturers like Taiwan Semiconductor, Samsung Electronics, and Intel. So if Taiwan Semi cuts its spending, it would reduce earnings across the semiconductor equipment supplier industry.

Further down the value chain are the cloud computing giants like Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Alphabet-owned Google Cloud, and Oracle. These companies benefit from increased AI spending, but they also serve general computing and storage needs. A slowdown in AI spending, or a widespread economic downturn, could reduce demand for additional cloud computing usage across major corporations.

By building out an AI portfolio across the value chain rather than focusing on one segment, you can help reduce volatility and limit the damage of an industry-specific pullback.

2. Ignoring position sizing

Portfolio sizing and allocation are just as important as the stocks and exchange-traded funds owned. You don’t want to be so diversified that your best ideas don’t make a big impact, but you also don’t want to be overly concentrated to the point where a handful of stocks can damage your financial health.

There’s no one-size-fits-all solution to diversification. But factors to consider include investment goals, investment time horizon, and risk tolerance.

A risk-averse investor would probably want to limit the size of a single stock in their financial portfolio, whereas an investor with a high risk tolerance and a multi-decade time horizon may not mind betting big on a handful of stocks, especially if they are still making new contributions to their investment accounts.

3. Buying stocks and not companies

Building a diversified portfolio isn’t enough. In fact, it’s not even the most important factor.

Arguably, the greatest mistake investors can make when approaching AI is to invest in stocks rather than companies. In other words, focusing too much on price action and potential gains rather than on what a company does and where it could be headed.

Peter Lynch’s investment advice to “know what you own, and why you own it,” still rings true today. Without conviction, a concoction of emotion and volatility can corrode the foundations of even the strongest portfolios. An investor may hold positions in stocks just because they are going up, even if those gains are temporary, because they don’t have to do with the underlying investment thesis.

The best investments are the ones you can put a decent amount of your portfolio into and be confident in owning, even if they suffer an extreme sell-off — like we saw in April during the height of trade tensions. If someone bought Nvidia just to make a quick buck, they may have been tempted to sell it when it fell by over 37% from its high in early April. Or when it dropped over 55% from its high in 2022. But someone investing in Nvidia for its multi-decade potential in AI data centers would have had an easier time holding the stock throughout these volatile periods.

Unlocking lasting success in the stock market

Diversifying across the AI value chain in companies you understand and with an awareness of portfolio sizing can help you build a portfolio that’s built to last, rather than one that can get hot only if the conditions are right.

Long-term investors know that success is more about making consistently good decisions over an extended period, rather than a few great ideas wedged between mediocrity and mistakes.

AI stocks have generated monster returns for patient investors, and many have the potential to create lasting generational wealth going forward. But those gains could take time, with many bumps along the way.

No one knows when the next major stock market sell-off will occur. Instead of guessing the timing and severity of a sell-off, it’s better to put your effort into following great companies and limiting mistakes.

In sum, diversification, conviction, and good companies are components that can help you build an investment suspension system capable of absorbing sell-off shocks.

Daniel Foelber has positions in ASML and Nvidia and has the following options: short November 2025 $820 calls on ASML. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends ASML, Advanced Micro Devices, Alphabet, Amazon, Applied Materials, Intel, Lam Research, Microsoft, Nvidia, Oracle, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. The Motley Fool recommends Broadcom and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft, short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft, and short November 2025 $21 puts on Intel. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Deep-Pocketed Investment Advisor Takes a $351 Million Step Back From This Shipping Giant, According to Wall Street Filing

Pacer Advisors, Inc. disclosed a significant reduction in its United Parcel Service (UPS 0.05%) holdings, selling 3,884,101 shares for an estimated $351.8 million, according to an SEC filing dated October 15, 2025.

What Happened

According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission dated October 15, 2025, Pacer Advisors, Inc. sold 3,884,101 shares of United Parcel Service during the quarter. The estimated transaction value, based on the average share price for the quarter, was ~$351.8 million. Following the sale, the fund held 533,764 shares, worth $44.59 million.

What Else to Know

This sale reduced the United Parcel Service stake to 0.11% of Pacer Advisors’ total reportable U.S. equity assets under management as of September 30, 2025.

Top holdings after the filing:

  • NASDAQ:NVDA: $569.61 million (1.65% of AUM as of September 30, 2025)
  • NASDAQ:AMAT: $499.48 million (1.44% of AUM as of September 30, 2025)
  • NYSE:XOM: $489.87 million (1.42% of AUM as of September 30, 2025)
  • NYSE:NEM: $483.92 million (1.40% of AUM as of September 30, 2025)
  • NYSE:MO: $467.63 million (1.35% of AUM as of September 30, 2025)

As of October 14, 2025, United Parcel Service shares were priced at $84.05, down 37.5% over the past year; shares have underperformed the S&P 500 by 47.9 percentage points on a price-change basis (ex-dividends) over the same period.

Company Overview

Metric Value
Revenue (TTM) $90.17 billion
Net Income (TTM) $5.73 billion
Dividend Yield 7.79%
Price (as of market close 10/14/25) $84.05

Company Snapshot

United Parcel Service, Inc. is a global leader in integrated freight and logistics, operating in over 200 countries and territories. The company leverages a vast transportation network and advanced technology to provide reliable, time-definite delivery services. UPS’s scale, diversified service offering, and operational efficiency underpin its competitive position in the logistics sector.

The company offers letter and package delivery, transportation, logistics, and supply chain solutions across U.S. domestic and international markets. It generates revenue through time-definite air and ground shipping, freight forwarding, customs brokerage, and ancillary logistics services.

United Parcel Service serves a diverse client base including businesses of all sizes, healthcare and life sciences organizations, and individual consumers globally.

Foolish Take

Pacer advisors, a private investment manager based out of Pennsylvania, recently disclosed the sale of nearly 3.9 million shares of United Parcel Service (UPS), worth more than $351 million. It’s another blow for a company whose stock has chronically underperformed key benchmarks recently.

For example, UPS shares have slipped nearly 48% over the last three years, while the S&P 500 has gained about 86% over the same period. That means UPS shares have underperformed the benchmark index by 134% dating back to late 2022.

Therefore, it’s no wonder that institutional support is drying up. Fund managers like Pacer are clearly retreating from the logistics giant. But why?

As is often the case, it comes down to fundamentals. Key metrics for UPS, like revenue, net income, and free cash flow have fallen steadily in recent years. Dating back to 2022, UPS’ revenue has fallen 10%; net income has dropped 50%; and free cash flow has slumped by an eye-popping 62%.

Clearly, a turnaround is needed for this iconic company. However, until the company can improve its overall fundamentals, retail investors may want to exercise caution with UPS stock.

Glossary

Assets Under Management (AUM): The total market value of all investments managed by a fund or investment firm.
Reportable U.S. Equity Assets: U.S. stock holdings that an investment manager must disclose in regulatory filings.
Stake: The ownership interest or position held in a company by an investor or fund.
Top Holdings: The largest investments in a fund’s portfolio, usually ranked by market value.
Dividend Yield: Annual dividends per share divided by the share price, expressed as a percentage.
Time-Definite Delivery: Shipping services that guarantee delivery by a specific date or time.
Freight Forwarding: The coordination and shipment of goods on behalf of shippers, often internationally.
Customs Brokerage: Service that helps importers and exporters comply with customs regulations and clear goods through customs.
Ancillary Logistics Services: Additional support services in logistics, such as warehousing, packaging, or inventory management.
TTM: The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.

Jake Lerch has positions in Altria Group, ExxonMobil, Nvidia, and United Parcel Service. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Applied Materials, Nvidia, and United Parcel Service. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

3 Top Vanguard ETFs to Buy Right Now

These three exchange-traded funds (ETFs) offer straightforward market access with rock-bottom fees.

Exchange-traded fund (ETF) investing removes the guesswork from portfolio construction. Rather than researching dozens of companies and hoping your picks outperform, ETFs deliver instant diversification across hundreds or thousands of stocks with a single purchase. The costs stay low — often just a few dollars per $10,000 invested each year — and ETFs eliminate the mistakes that hurt individual stock pickers who panic during market drops or chase hot stocks at the wrong time.

Among fund families, Vanguard deserves special attention. Fund investors actually own the management company itself, which means Vanguard works for shareholders instead of outside profit-seekers. This setup keeps costs far below what most competitors charge. Lower costs mean more money stays in your account, and those savings add up to significantly higher returns over decades.

A hand writing exchange traded fund on a blackboard.

Image source: Getty Images.

Three Vanguard ETFs stand out as core holdings for investors building wealth over time. Here’s a brief overview of each fund and how it may fit into a well-diversified portfolio.

The everything U.S. stock fund

Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI 0.47%) tracks nearly 100% of the investable U.S. equity market through ownership of roughly 3,500 stocks spanning large-cap giants down to tiny specialists. The fund captures the full range of American business — from Nvidia powering the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution at 6.5% of assets to small regional banks and industrial firms that barely move the needle individually but collectively represent substantial economic activity.

The Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF sports an expense ratio of just 0.03% annually while delivering a 1.11% annualized yield and 14.7% average returns over the past 10 years. That outstanding performance reflects the advantage of owning everything rather than trying to pick winners.

Furthermore, the fund automatically adjusts as companies grow or shrink, ensuring Microsoft and Apple earn their positions through market performance rather than manager guesswork. For investors seeking one fund that covers the entire U.S. market, the Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF delivers complete coverage at rock-bottom cost.

The global diversification play

Vanguard Total International Stock ETF (VXUS 0.86%) covers what U.S.-only portfolios miss. The fund holds over 8,600 stocks from developed and emerging markets outside the U.S., creating exposure to economies and industries where American companies operate less.

Top holdings include Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing at 2.46% — the world’s leading chip manufacturer — along with Chinese tech giants Tencent and Alibaba, European leaders like ASML and SAP, and thousands of mid-sized firms across Asia, Europe, and Latin America.

The Vanguard Total International Stock ETF costs just 0.05% per year, delivers a 2.78% yield that runs well above most domestic funds, and has posted 8.4% average annual returns over the past 10 years. International stocks have trailed U.S. returns recently, but these markets trade at cheaper prices and offer diversification benefits when domestic momentum eventually reverses.

The fund’s massive holding count prevents too much concentration in any single company, while the higher yield provides current income that can be reinvested or spent. For portfolios weighted too heavily toward U.S. stocks, this fund provides geographic balance.

The technology concentration play

Vanguard Information Technology ETF (VGT 0.77%) narrows its focus to the main sector driving market returns — technology. The fund holds roughly 316 stocks classified under information technology — software, hardware, semiconductors, and IT services — with Nvidia, Microsoft, and Apple combining for about 44% of total assets. That concentration creates higher ups and downs but also captures the ongoing shift toward digital infrastructure, AI, and cloud computing that defines modern economic growth.

The Vanguard Information Technology ETF charges 0.09% annually, yields just 0.4% as tech companies reinvest cash into growth rather than paying dividends, and has delivered exceptional 23.4% average annual returns over the past 10 years. That performance reflects tech dominance — technology now makes up roughly 30% of the benchmark S&P 500, and this fund provides pure exposure without watering it down with utilities or consumer staples.

The risk comes from concentration. When tech sells off, this fund falls harder than diversified alternatives. But for investors who believe software continues taking over more industries and AI represents real change rather than hype, this fund offers direct access to the companies building that future.

George Budwell has positions in Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, and Vanguard Information Technology ETF. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends ASML, Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, Tencent, Vanguard Total International Stock ETF, and Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF. The Motley Fool recommends Alibaba Group and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Why Hillenbrand Stock Skyrocketed Today

The company is being taken off the market for a substantial premium.

One of the better-performing stocks on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) Wednesday was Hillenbrand (HI 18.20%). The specialized industrial company saw its share price leap more than 18% on news that it’s going private in a splashy buyout deal. That rise was far more pronounced than the S&P 500‘s (^GSPC 0.40%) 0.4% bump.

A $3.8 billion buyout

Before the NYSE opened for trading that day, Hillenbrand announced it has signed a definitive agreement to be acquired by an unnamed affiliate of private equity firm Lone Star Funds. The deal will be effected entirely in cash, to the tune of $32 per Hillenbrand share. All told, the company said, the enterprise value of the arrangement is around $3.8 billion.

Happy person using headphones and a phone while lying on a couch.

Image source: Getty Images.

Hillenbrand said that the purchase price represents a premium of around 37% over its Aug. 12 closing share price.

In the press release trumpeting the deal, the company quoted chairperson of its board of directors Helen Cornell as saying that it “delivers immediate and certain cash value to our shareholders at a substantial premium to recent trading.”

She added that it also “positions Hillenbrand to continue meeting and exceeding customers’ needs for highly engineered, mission-critical processing equipment and solutions.”

Bye bye, stock market

When the buyout closes, Hillenbrand will delist from the NYSE, and thus no longer be publicly traded. The company anticipates the buyout will be completed by the end of the first calendar quarter of 2026. It is subject to approval by its shareholders, and that of the relevant regulatory bodies.

Eric Volkman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Why Did Advanced Micro Devices Stock Soar 9.4% Today?

AMD stock was flying today. Here’s why.

Shares of Advanced Micro Devices (AMD 9.36%) jumped on Wednesday, finishing the day up 9.4%. The spike came as the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq Composite gained 0.4% and 0.6%, respectively.

The chipmaker’s stock is continuing to surge after Oracle announced it intends to deploy 50,000 AMD chips by the end of 2026.

Oracle will use AMD

Oracle, an increasingly central player in AI cloud computing, will purchase 50,000 of AMD’s next-generation MI450 chips to power its servers. The chips are designed to compete head-to-head with those of Nvidia.

This is the latest in a string of announcements that make clear that AMD has a much more substantial role to play in AI than it has up to this point. Just this month, OpenAI and AMD announced a major deal that could see the ChatGPT creator owning roughly 10% of the company in exchange for purchasing a large number of AMD chips.

A computer chip.

Image source: Getty Images.

Speaking to AMD’s growing role, Karan Batta, senior vice president of Oracle Cloud Infrastructure, said she expects customers “to take up AMD very, very well — especially in the inferencing space.”

AMD looks to be capitalizing on the AI opportunity, and if AI demand holds, it could do very well. While the stock is anything but cheap, it’s a good pick given its growth prospects.

Johnny Rice has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Advanced Micro Devices, Nvidia, and Oracle. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Chesapeake Asset Management Begins Investing in Ryder System. Is the Stock a Buy?

What happened

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

What else to know

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

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

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

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

Company Overview

Metric Value
Revenue (TTM) $12.72 billion
Net Income (TTM) $505.00 million
Dividend Yield 1.83%
Price (as of market close 2025-10-14) $182.01

Company Snapshot

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

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

A trucker sits in the cab of his truck.

IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.

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

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

Foolish take

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

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

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

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

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

Glossary

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

JPMorgan Chase is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Robert Izquierdo has positions in Apple, JPMorgan Chase, and Microsoft. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple, JPMorgan Chase, Microsoft, and Spotify Technology. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Davenport & Company Buys Another $47 Million Worth of UnitedHealth Group (NYSE: UNH) Stock

On October 15, 2025, Davenport & Co LLC disclosed a purchase of 155,551 shares of UnitedHealth Group (UNH) for the period ended Q3 2025, an estimated $47.04 million trade.

What happened

An SEC filing dated October 15, 2025 shows Davenport increased its position in UnitedHealth Group (UNH 0.38%) by 155,551 shares during Q3 2025.

The estimated transaction value, based on the average closing price during the quarter, was approximately $47.04 million.

The post-trade position reached 739,525 shares, with a market value of $255.34 million.

What else to know

Following this buy, UnitedHealth Group accounts for 1.36% of Davenport $18.76 billion in 13F reportable assets

The firm’s top holdings after the filing:

  1. Brookfield Corp: $583.81 million (3.13% of AUM)
  2. Microsoft: $478.54 million (2.56% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
  3. Amazon: $451.10 million (2.42% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
  4. Markel: $391.43 million (2.1% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30
  5. Nvidia: $375.98 million (2.01% of AUM) as of 2025-09-30

As of October 14, 2025, shares of UnitedHealth Group were priced at $359.93, down 40.6% over the prior year and underperforming the S&P 500 by 53 percentage points over the same period.

Company Overview

Metric Value
Price (as of market close 2025-10-14) $359.93
Market Capitalization $325.98 billion
Revenue (TTM) $422.82 billion
Net Income (TTM) $21.30 billion

Company Snapshot

UnitedHealth Group:

  • Offers health benefit plans, pharmacy care services, healthcare management, and data analytics solutions through segments including UnitedHealthcare and Optum.
  • Generates revenue primarily from insurance premiums, healthcare services, and pharmacy benefit management, leveraging scale and integrated platforms.
  • Serves national and public sector employers, government programs (Medicare, Medicaid), individuals, and healthcare providers across the United States.

UnitedHealth Group is a leading diversified healthcare company with a broad national footprint and an integrated business model spanning insurance, pharmacy benefits, and healthcare services. The company maintains a competitive edge through its extensive provider networks, data-driven solutions, and ability to serve a wide range of customer segments.

Foolish take

Davenport & Company continued to add to their UnitedHealth position, which now accounts for 1.4% of the firm’s portfolio and is its 9th-largest position.

What makes Davenport’s purchases over the last two quarters noteworthy is that they are essentially doubling down on the company right after its stock sold off heavily.

Hampered by ballooning medical costs, changes in leadership, reduced guidance, and mounting regulatory pressure, UnitedHealth’s stock dropped 39% from its highs in just the last six months.

While UnitedHealth has become a battleground stock of sorts lately, it received a major lift after Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway disclosed it took a $1.6 billion stake in the stock in the second quarter of 2025.

That is great company for Davenport to join, as it also adds to its stake in UnitedHealth.

Regardless of the headwinds facing UnitedHealth, the company remains one of the most dominant health insurers in the United States.

Currently trading at just 16 times earnings and 13 times free cash flow, the risk-reward ratio on UnitedHealth Group is very appealing.

Glossary

13F reportable AUM: Assets under management that must be disclosed in quarterly SEC Form 13F filings by institutional investment managers.
Quarterly average price: The average price of a security over a specific quarter, used for estimating transaction values.
Post-trade holdings: The total number of shares or value held in a security after a trade is completed.
Top holdings: The largest investments in a fund or portfolio, ranked by market value.
Pharmacy benefit management: Services that manage prescription drug programs for health plans, employers, and government programs.
Integrated platforms: Systems that combine multiple services or business functions into a unified offering.
Provider networks: Groups of healthcare professionals and facilities contracted to deliver services to insurance plan members.
Medicare: A U.S. federal health insurance program for people aged 65 and older, and certain younger individuals with disabilities.
Medicaid: A joint federal and state program in the U.S. providing health coverage to eligible low-income individuals.
TTM: The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.

Josh Kohn-Lindquist has positions in Nvidia. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, Brookfield, Brookfield Corporation, Markel Group, Microsoft, and Nvidia. The Motley Fool recommends UnitedHealth Group and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Central Banker Report Cards 2025: United By Uncertainty

Central banks brace for 2026 inflation risks, but lack consensus on how to tackle them.

table visualization

The single word that best captures the state of the global economy across every continent is uncertainty. Business leaders feel it acutely, but nowhere is it more pressing than in the deliberations of central bankers. Monetary authorities are operating in an environment where the trajectory of growth, trade, and inflation is increasingly difficult to predict, forcing them to rely on caution. With diverging approaches and contrasting trends, it is under this cloud of uncertainty that central banks around the world have been conducting policy, often struggling to anticipate the consequences of sudden shifts in the global economic order. It was in this environment that Global Finance conducted its 31st annual grading of central bankers, covering 105 countries.

METHODOLOGY Global Finance editors, with input from financial industry sources, grade the world’s leading central bankers from A to F, with A+ being the highest grade and F the lowest, based on objective and subjective metrics. These judgments are based on performance from July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025. A governor must have held office for at least a year to receive a letter grade. Central bankers in countries that are in deep conflicts are not included due to incomplete information. An algorithm supports consistency of grading across geographies. The proprietary formula factors in monetary policy, financial system supervision, asset-purchase and bond-sale programs, forecasting and guidance, transparency, political independence, and success in meeting the national mandate (which differs from country to country).

Much of the turbulence traces back to January, when Donald Trump was sworn in as President of the United States. His campaign rhetoric quickly gave way to executive actions and the expansive introduction of tariffs, abrupt reversals, and a constant stop-and-go of policy decisions that have dominated international economic discussions. While nations with limited trade exposure to the United States may feel fewer immediate shocks, all are affected by the ripple effects. Global supply chains, commodity markets, and cross-border investment flows remain unsettled, complicating the work of central banks everywhere.

Monetary policy, of course, depends on a reasonably clear outlook for growth and prices. Tariffs, however, inject volatility on both fronts: they can weaken trade and investment, undermine business confidence, and simultaneously stoke inflationary pressures by raising import costs. This dual risk—slowing activity combined with rising prices—leaves central banks in a precarious position, uncertain whether to tighten policy in defense of price stability or loosen it to support growth. Thus, even countries far removed from the direct line of tariff fire ultimately confront the consequences, as developments in the world’s two largest economies—the US and China—reverberate through the global system and challenge the traditional levers of monetary policy.

This divergence has already become evident. In September, the US Federal Reserve resumed its easing cycle with its first rate cut since December 2024, setting itself apart from most other major central banks that remain on hold. The Fed signaled further cuts in October and December, citing a weakening labor market as the key driver. Markets are now pricing in an additional 50 basis points of easing by yearend. The Bank of Canada followed with a cut to 2.5%, its lowest level in three years, also reflecting labor market weakness. Markets see a 40% probability of another cut next month.

By contrast, the Bank of England and the Bank of Japan left rates unchanged, while the European Central Bank also held steady and indicated its rate-cutting cycle may be nearing an end. The risk, however, is that central bankers could face renewed inflationary pressures in 2026.

“This is lift-off, and the [US Federal Reserve] is now all in on supporting the labor market, signaling a decisively aggressive cutting cycle in 2025. The message is clear: growth and employment are the priority, even if that means tolerating higher inflation in the near term.” Olu Sonola, Head of US Economic Research at Fitch Ratings, said. “For now, the Fed is effectively communicating that it will cross the higher-inflation bridge if it shows up in 2026. What’s striking is the lack of consensus around 2026. The absence of a unified view on policy suggests the Fed may once again find itself in wait-and-see mode early next year, navigating inflation risks as they emerge rather than preempting them.”

Central Banker Report Cards 2025: By Region

Central Banker Report Cards Africa
Africa
central banker report cards Asia-Pacific
Asia-Pacific
Central Banker Report Cards 2025 - Central and Eastern Europe
Central and Eastern Europe
Central Banker Report Cards 2025: Latin America
Latin America
Central Banker Report Cards - Middle East
Middle East
Central Banker Report Cards 2025 - North America
North America
Central Banker Report Cards - Western Europe
Western Europe

Source link

Large Investment Manager Hits the Eject Button on Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stock. Should Retail Investors Look to Buy on the Dip?

On October 14, 2025, CCLA Investment Management disclosed it had sold its entire position in NICE (NICE -1.26%) in an estimated $120.03 million transaction.

What Happened

According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission dated October 14, 2025, CCLA Investment Management exited its holding in NICE by selling all 710,865 shares, with an estimated trade value of $120.03 million.

What Else to Know

CCLA Investment Management sold out of NICE, reducing its post-trade stake to zero; the position now represents 0% of 13F AUM.

Top holdings following the filing:

  • NASDAQ:MSFT – $369.63 million (5.9% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025
  • NASDAQ:GOOGL – $345.87 million (5.5% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025
  • NASDAQ:AMZN – $269.0 million (4.3% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025
  • NASDAQ:AVGO – $207.92 million (3.3% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025
  • NYSE:V – $180.65 million (2.9% of AUM) as of September 30, 2025

As of October 13, 2025, shares of NICE were priced at $132.00, marking a 23.8% decrease over the year ended October 13, 2025. Over the same period, shares have underperformed the S&P 500 by 35.5 percentage points.

Company Overview

Metric Value
Revenue (TTM) $2.84 billion
Net Income (TTM) $541.15 million
Price (as of market close 2025-10-13) $132.00
One-Year Price Change (23.83%)

Company Snapshot

NICE Ltd. delivers AI-powered cloud software solutions designed to optimize customer experience and enhance compliance for enterprises and public sector organizations worldwide. The company leverages a broad portfolio of proprietary platforms and analytics tools to address complex business needs in digital transformation, financial crime prevention, and operational efficiency.

The company offers AI-driven cloud platforms for customer experience, financial crime prevention, analytics, and digital evidence management, including flagship products such as CXone, Enlighten, and X-Sight.

NICE Ltd. serves a global client base of enterprises, contact centers, financial institutions, and public safety agencies seeking advanced automation, compliance, and customer engagement solutions. It operates a subscription-based business model, generating revenue from cloud services, software licensing, and value-added solutions for enterprise and public sector clients.

Foolish Take

In a recent regulatory filing, CCLA Investment Management revealed that it has completely sold out of its ~$120 million position in NICE, an Israeli software company. This move comes following a tough period for NICE stock.

Over the last five years, the company’s stock has consistently underperformed the broader market. Shares have logged a total return of (44%) over this period, equating to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of (11%). This compares quite unfavorably to the S&P 500, which has generated a total return of 105% over the last five years, equating to a CAGR of 15%.

All that said, NICE’s stock performance doesn’t reflect its underlying fundamentals. Total revenue, net income, and free cash flow have all increased significantly over the last five years, indicating strength in the company’s business model, which relies on artificial intelligence (AI) to power applications serving contact centers, financial institutions, and public safety organizations. Moreover, the company recently announced plans to buy back up to $500 million worth of its outstanding shares, which could help put a floor under its share price.

While CCLA’s recent sale does indicate the deterioration of some institutional support, retail investors may want to take a look at NICE — an under-the-radar AI growth stock.

Glossary

13F reportable assets: Assets disclosed by institutional investment managers in quarterly SEC Form 13F filings.

AUM (Assets Under Management): The total market value of investments managed by a fund or investment firm on behalf of clients.

Quarterly average price: The average price of a security over a specific quarter, often used to estimate transaction values.

Post-trade stake: The number of shares or value held in a position after a trade is completed.

Flagship products: A company’s leading or most prominent products, often representing its brand or core offerings.

Cloud platforms: Online computing environments that provide scalable software and services over the internet.

Digital evidence management: Systems for storing, organizing, and analyzing electronic data used in investigations or compliance.

Financial crime prevention: Technologies and practices designed to detect and stop illegal financial activities, such as fraud or money laundering.

Compliance: Adhering to laws, regulations, and industry standards relevant to a business or sector.

TTM: The 12-month period ending with the most recent quarterly report.

Operational efficiency: The ability of a company to deliver products or services using minimal resources and costs.

Jake Lerch has positions in Alphabet, Amazon, and Visa. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft, Nice, and Visa. The Motley Fool recommends Broadcom and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link