talking

Many investors don’t readily think of dividends and tech together, but there’s more than meets the eye with this union.

Talk to enough experienced dividend investors and chances are they’ll rattle off sectors like consumer staples, healthcare and utilities as some of their favorite payout destinations. Odds are equally good that they won’t mention technology.

That’s understandable, because the 12-month distribution rate on the largest exchange traded fund (ETF) tracking the tech-heavy Nasdaq-100 Index is a piddly 0.48%Obviously nothing to write home about, but that data point obfuscates tech’s status as a rising payout growth spot. In fact, in dollar terms, Microsoft (MSFT 0.78%) and Apple (AAPL 0.42%) are two of the biggest dividend payers in the S&P 500.

Image source: Getty Images

Apple and Microsoft are widely held stocks, but in what amounts to a pleasant surprise for equity income investors, the duo is an appetizer in the tech dividend equation. Seven-course meals are available with the First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund (TDIV 0.79%) and the ProShares S&P Technology Dividend Aristocrats ETF (TDV 0.81%).

Similar tickers, but different methodologies. So, let’s examine how these ETFs live up to their tech dividend billings.

TDV: A familiar playbook

As its name implies, the ProShares S&P Technology Dividend Aristocrats ETF has Dividend Aristocrats DNA. The TDV follows the S&P Technology Dividend Aristocrats – a collection of tech companies that have increased payouts for at least seven straight years.

With tech and dividends still considered newlyweds, that index requirement sounds confining, but TDV holds 38 stocks. That roster size is aided by index flexibility that allows for “tech-related” companies. Mastercard (MA 0.42%) and Visa (V 1.39%) being prime examples.

If there’s a rub with TDV’s plumbing, it’s that the dividend increase streak requirement precludes some big names from entering the index. For example, Alphabet (GOOG -0.98%) and Nvidia (NVDA 0.24%) are dividend payers, but they haven’t increased payouts for seven straight years, so they’re not yet candidates for TDV admission.

TDV has points in its favor, including equally weighting its holdings. That means the ETF can be an income-generating complement to stakes in tech funds that weigh components by market capitalization – many of which have rosters where a small number of stocks command whopping percentages of the portfolios.

TDIV: Tech dividend flexibility

While TDV’s dividend increase streak mandate has a country club membership feel to it, the First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund has its own elements of exclusivity. The fund follows the Nasdaq Technology Dividend™ Index, which has several rules dividend investors need to acknowledge. Those include requiring member firms to have paid a dividend over the past year, no payout cuts over that time and a minimum yield of 0.50%.

By eschewing the payout increase streak protocol, TDIV sports a significantly larger roster than its rival – 94 holdings to be precise. There’s another big difference between the tech dividend ETFs. TDIV holdings are dividend value-weighted. In plain English, the ETF’s index places added emphasis on stocks with big dividends and massive market caps. Hence, Broadcom (AVGO 0.88%), Oracle (ORCL 0.84%) and Microsoft combine for nearly a quarter of the ETF’s weight. TDIV has a different way of doing things, but it’s hard to argue with its performance since inception in August 2012.

There are other marquee differences between TDIV and its nearest competitor. Notably, the First Trust ETF can hold international stocks, some of which have been additive to performance, and 20% of its portfolio can be allocated to communication services stocks. The latter point is pertinent because if Alphabet and Meta Platforms (META -1.08%) increase their payouts enough to drive their yields to 0.50%, those stocks would be eligible for TDIV admittance, perhaps increasing the ETF’s growth profile along the way.

Different tech dividend strokes for different folks

For fee-conscious investors, TDV is an appealing option because its annual expense ratio is 0.45%, or $45 on a $10,000 position, compared to TDIV’s 0.50%, but fee tussles aren’t the end ETF comparisons. Smart investors know there’s more to the story.

The ProShares ETF may be more appropriate for investors seeking documented dividend dependability via an instrument that as currently constructed, leans into mature, older guard technology companies. Plus, the fund’s equal-weight methodology may be attractive at a time when so many cap-weighted indexes are heavily concentrated in a small number of stocks.

On the other hand, TDIV is perhaps the better choice for growth investors that want a dash of income. Past performance isn’t a guarantee of future returns, but it shouldn’t be ignored that over the past three years, TDIV’s returns and volatility traits stacked up well against some traditional tech ETFs, indicating its flexibility and index mechanics play in investors’ favor.

In 2013, then-businessman and reality TV star Donald Trump shared his vision on Fox News about the role a United States president should play in a government shutdown: “You have to be nice and be angry and be wild and cajole and do all sorts of things, but you have to get a deal.”

Now, as president, Trump has taken a different approach. After failing to reach a bipartisan agreement, he mocked Democrats by posting an expletive-laced video generated by artificial intelligence and set to mariachi music, falsely showing US Representative Hakeem Jeffries wearing a sombrero and US Senator Chuck Schumer saying that “nobody likes Democrats any more”, so the party is seeking favour with “illegal aliens”.

Welcome to the 2025 US government shutdown.

At PolitiFact, we have fact-checked lawmakers’ and pundits’ statements about government shutdowns for more than a decade. When Congress can’t reach a funding agreement, both sides of the political aisle whip up talking points about what a shutdown means for the economy, immigration, worker paycheques, disaster response and services for low-income families. The blame is nearly always placed on the other party.

A reminder: Republicans control the presidency and both chambers of Congress. But passing legislation to extend government funding at current levels would require, under longstanding rules, more than half a dozen Democrats to side with Republicans in order to reach the 60-vote threshold to advance to a vote. This gives Democrats some negotiating leverage, which they are seeking to use in the spending fight.

Social services

Women, Infants, and Children programme will ‘not be funded’

House Speaker Mike Johnson, in September 29 remarks to reporters.

Johnson omits that enrollees will still likely get services, at least initially. But much depends on how long the shutdown lasts.

The Agriculture Department’s shutdown plan said its Women, Infants and Children nutrition programme, which provides food to low-income families, shall continue operations “subject to the availability of funding”. The WIC has 6.9 million participants.

WIC should be able to continue for at least one week, said Alison Hard, National WIC Association policy director. After that, operations will vary by state, depending on their funds.

During a shutdown, state WIC programmes have options to temporarily fill the funding gap, including various USDA sources, state money and requesting early rebate payments from their contracted infant formula manufacturers.

Past shutdowns

‘Back in 2013, Trump said it was the President’s job to negotiate and avoid a shutdown’

Senator Jeff Merkley, in a September 29 X post

That’s an accurate paraphrase of Trump’s remarks.

In an October 7, 2013, interview with then-Fox News host Greta Van Susteren, Trump criticised then-President Barack Obama for not being a dealmaker during the shutdown. In full, he said: “You have to get everybody in a room. You have to be a leader. The president has to lead. He has to get [the Speaker of the House] and everybody else in a room, and they have to make a deal. You have to be nice and be angry and be wild and cajole and do all sorts of things, but you have to get a deal.”

Trump made similar remarks in a September 2013 Fox & Friends phone interview: “Problems start from the top, and they have to get solved from the top, and the president’s the leader, and he’s got to get everybody in a room, and he’s got to lead.”

Healthcare

Republicans are spiking health insurance premiums by 75 percent for everyday Americans if they don’t extend enhanced ACA subsidies

Representative Katherine Clark, in a September 12 X post.

This is mostly true.

If the Republican-controlled Congress does not extend Affordable Care Act enhanced subsidies before they expire at the end of this year, enrollees will have to pay more.

A KFF analysis of federal data found that the average increase in out-of-pocket coverage cost for enrollees would be 79 percent, with state-by-state average increases ranging from 49 percent to 195 percent.

This cost increase would come from a combination of insurance premium increases and the disappearance of subsidies, rather than from “spiking health insurance premiums” alone.

More than two weeks after Clark’s statement – and after we published the fact check – KFF produced a revised figure for average increases based on new data: 114 percent.

‘Democrats so-called proposal is a partisan wish list with a $1.5 trillion spending increase tacked onto a four-week funding bill’

House Speaker Mike Johnson, in a September 29 news release.

The Republican talking point misses the context of the Democrats’ proposal.

The September 17 Democratic proposal latches government funding up until October 31, known as a “continuing resolution”, to some Democratic priorities, including healthcare assistance and limiting Trump’s ability to claw back funds previously approved by Congress.

The bill calls for permanently extending enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that were passed in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic and extended in 2022. Those are set to expire on December 31 this year. The Democratic bill would also reverse cuts to Medicaid and other health programmes that Republicans enacted in their signature tax and spending legislation.

The Democrats’ measure would restore funding for public broadcasting that Republicans nixed in July and includes at least $320m for security for lawmakers, the executive branch and the Supreme Court. (Republicans have proposed $88m in security funding in their resolution bill.)

The bill also contains mandates for how the Trump administration can spend money and would hinder the White House’s recent attempt to cancel almost $5bn in foreign aid.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a group that’s hawkish on the deficit, said in a September 18 news release that Democrats’ proposal in its entirety would add $1.5 trillion to the national debt over the next decade.

“The [continuing resolution] itself – the part that funds the government – would not add $1.5 trillion to the debt, but the bill that Democrats have proposed includes other provisions that would,” Chris Towner, the group’s policy director, wrote in an email. “The bill repeals the health spending cuts that were included in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which would cost about $1.1 trillion over a decade to repeal.”

Towner also said the Democrats’ provision to make the enhanced ACA subsidies permanent would cost about $350bn over a decade.

If enhanced subsidies are not extended, people with insurance through the Affordable Care Act will see their premiums rise ‘twice as much in the rural areas’

Senator Amy Klobuchar, in a September 28 interview on CBS’s Face the Nation

This is mostly true.

There are at least two ways to interpret Klobuchar’s statement: that she was comparing rural enrollees’ costs with people living elsewhere, or comparing their costs with what they paid before.

Klobuchar’s office told PolitiFact that the senator was referring to rural enrollees seeing increases that were double what they had paid before, and that interpretation aligns with what Klobuchar has said in other settings.

An analysis by the Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, found that out-of-pocket insurance costs would increase on average in rural counties from $713 to $1,473 – a 107 percent increase, or slightly more than a doubling.

Comparing rural enrollees’ cost increases with people elsewhere, it amounts to a disproportionately large increase for rural areas, but it’s not twice as much.

Enrollees in rural counties would see average out-of-pocket losses of $760 from expiring enhanced subsidies, compared with $624 for all counties and $593 for urban counties. That’s 22 percent more for rural enrollees compared with all others, and 28 percent more compared with urban enrollees.

Government workers

‘If the government shuts down, members of Congress still get paid. The janitors never get paid’

Daniel Koh, on The People’s Cabinet podcast episode, September 29.

This is mostly true.

Members of the House and Senate continue to get paid during a shutdown. Federal law says federal employees get back pay, but the law does not extend to contractors, a group that includes many janitors. Some private employers with federal contracts may find ways to pay their employees, but there is nothing in federal law that requires it.

‘FEMA won’t be funded’ during hurricane season because of the shutdown

House Speaker Mike Johnson, in September 29 remarks to reporters

Johnson was correct that Congress had not agreed on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding, but a Department of Homeland Security shutdown procedures plan estimates that 84 percent of FEMA employees will continue working. (The DHS oversees FEMA.)

“Bottom line: hurricanes don’t care about politics. FEMA will still respond. But recovery will stall if Congress can’t do its job,” said Craig Fugate, who led FEMA during President Barack Obama’s administration after leading Florida’s emergency management under then-Republican Governor Jeb Bush. “This isn’t new – both parties own the blame.”

The agency’s recovery efforts are most at risk, Fugate said, because they depend on how much money remains in the Disaster Relief Fund. “Those dollars aren’t tied to the shutdown, but they usually run low this time of year. Normally, Congress passes a continuing resolution to add money. A shutdown means that doesn’t happen. That slows recovery projects, not the immediate response.”

The fund had about $2.3bn at the end of August, which is considered low.

SoFi Technologies (SOFI -0.45%) has faced plenty of sceptics since going public in 2021. Many investors viewed it as a niche player in student loan refinancing, doubting it could ever achieve profitability.

Fast-forward to today, and SoFi not only generates consistent profits, it’s expanding into new areas that have the market buzzing. Shares recently surged to fresh highs, putting the company squarely in the fintech spotlight.

Here are three reasons why everyone is talking about SoFi right now — and what investors should keep in mind before following the crowd into buying the stock.

Image source: Getty Images.

A different kind of bank

SoFi isn’t your typical bank. While most financial institutions make money through a patchwork of branches, tellers, and specialized divisions, SoFi operates as a digital-first platform. Its pitch is simple: Manage your entire financial life in one app.

That means you can open a checking account, refinance a loan, trade stocks or crypto, and even buy into new exchange-traded funds (ETFs) — all in one account. The company’s strategy is to cross-sell as many products as possible to each customer, increasing engagement and lowering churn.

This integrated approach matters. Traditional banks often specialize in one area — say, deposits and mortgages — while a brokerage focuses on investing. By integrating everything into a single ecosystem, SoFi increases switching costs and fosters long-term customer loyalty.

Financials are finally clicking

For years, critics argued that SoFi could attract users but not profits. And they were right, at least until 2023.

But that narrative is shifting as Sofi has delivered two consecutive years of positive adjusted net income and continues to do so in 2025. In the second quarter of 2025, adjusted net revenue rose 44% year over year to $858 million. Adjusted net income surged 459% to $97 million. The solid performance is a result of a record high in new members, new products, and an increase in fee-based revenue.

Membership growth was equally impressive. SoFi added 846,000 new members in Q2 2025, pushing its base to 11.7 million — more than double what it had three years ago. Crucially, the mix of revenue is changing. Fee-based revenue contributed 44% of total revenue, indicating the company has expanded beyond its student loan financing roots.

Even its lending portfolio has performed well of late as the company originated a record $8.8 billion in loans in the quarter, while bad debt charge-off has largely been declining over the last few quarters. Expectations for lower interest rates could also further boost lending volumes and profitability in the coming quarters.

Beyond banking

SoFi could easily stop at being a profitable digital bank. Instead, management is pushing into new frontiers. The company will restart its crypto service this year, enabling members to trade Bitcoin and Ethereum. While volatile, crypto broadens SoFi’s appeal among younger and more tech-savvy users.

It also launched new investment products, like the SoFi Agentic AI ETF, designed to capture investor interest in artificial intelligence. Beyond ETFs, SoFi is expanding into private market funds, giving retail investors access to opportunities once reserved for institutions.

These moves highlight SoFi’s ambition to build a full-spectrum financial platform. But they also come with risk. Each market brings established competitors — from Robinhood Markets in trading, to BlackRock in asset management, to Coinbase Global in crypto. Execution and regulatory oversight will be ongoing challenges that investors should track.

What does it mean for investors?

SoFi is no longer just a one-dimensional fintech tied to student loans. It’s becoming a diversified platform with real profitability and a broad set of growth levers. That’s why the stock is getting so much attention right now.

Still, investors should recognize the risks. Valuations already incorporate optimism — as of this writing, the stock trades at a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 62 times — and SoFi must prove it can balance banking, investing, and emerging areas like crypto without losing focus.

For growth investors, the pitch is straightforward. If SoFi can scale its ecosystem while executing on new growth bets, it has the potential to be a defining financial company of this generation.

Either way, it’s worth keeping the stock on watch.

WHEN I was doing the research for this SURI review, I came across some alarming stats.

Every year, over four billion toothbrushes end up either in landfill or, more worryingly, in the ocean.

And it takes so long for a single toothbrush to decompose that almost every plastic toothbrush produced since the 1930s is still languishing somewhere on the planet.

If you’re an electric toothbrush user, you might think you’re exempt from this, but — I hate to break it to you — you’re not. In fact, you’re probably worse.

SURI 2.0 Electric Toothbrush, £105

Happily, there’s now an ingeniously designed, decently affordable alternative.

Last week, SURI — a brand favoured by celebs including Gwyneth Paltrow — unveiled its second-generation SURI 2.0 toothbrush, and I was lucky enough to get my hands on one prior to its release date.

I’ve used the original SURI 1.0 toothbrush for years, but for the last month I’ve been getting to grips with the new model.

Pros

• One of the most thoughtfully-designed products I think I’ve ever come across — the attention to detail is astounding
• MUCH more sustainable than alternatives
• Brilliant battery life
• Pretty affordable, depending on which generation you go for
• Perfect for travel
• If you take care of it, it’ll last forever
• Dentist-approved (it’s approved by the dentist I spoke to, at least)

Cons

• The first generation doesn’t have pressure sensing, which can lead to overbrushing
• The second generation is significantly more expensive than the first
• There’s no bells and whistles like app connectivity — but do you really need them?

Rating: 9.5/10

How I tested the SURI toothbrush

I first met the co-founder of SURI, Mark, at a press event almost three years ago.

His knowledge and passion blew me away, and he was kind enough to give me one of the brand’s toothbrushes to try myself.

It’s tackled my gnashers daily ever since — it’s moved house twice with me, and gone on several holidays.

This summer, I was one of several lucky journalists to be sent the brand’s new and upgraded toothbrush, the SURI 2.0.

As the Sun’s reviews manager, it’s my job to hold it to account, ensuring that it delivers on its promises, provides value for money, and handles day-to-day operations.

SURI toothbrush review: The Nitty Gritty

First impressions

SURI 1.0 Electric Toothbrush, £75

Before I encountered SURI in 2022, I’d happily been using a middle-of-the-road electric toothbrush, without thinking too much about its environmental impact.

If you’d put a gun to my head, I’d probably have told you that electric toothbrushes are better for the environment than manual ones, as they don’t have to be thrown away every couple of months.

I’d have been wrong.

In fact, they’re a nightmare combo of hard-to-mine rare earth metals, carbon-dioxide-heavy manufacturing processes and “planned obsolescence” — they’re only designed to last three to five years or so, so that you routinely come back and buy a new one.

That means that they, too, end up in landfills, where their toxic components can leech into soil and water supplies.

SURI (short for “Sustainable Rituals”), by comparison, has put a LOT of thought into how to end the environmental nightmare caused by billions of humans brushing their teeth.

The handle is made from aluminium, rather than the hard plastic preferred by other brands. This is a very conscious choice — 75% of all aluminium ever created is still in circulation today, because it’s such an easy-to-recycle material.

Other parts of the toothbrush are made from clever materials like cornstarch (the head), castor oil (the bristles), and steel (the internal components).

These are all designed to have as small an environmental impact as possible — when you buy replacement heads, SURI sends you a mail bag so that you can return your used heads to be industrially composted.

Does it deliver?

1

SURI 2.0 Electric Toothbrush, £105

So we’ve established that SURI is more sustainable than its competitors — but does it make a better toothbrush?

When I’ve spoken to the company’s co-founder, Mark, he has emphasised the company’s decision not to include the app-powered, Bluetooth-compatible bells and whistles you get in other toothbrushes.

After all, what percentage of people really want to link their toothbrush to an app? Most people I’ve encountered want to get the chore over and done with so they can go to bed.

Instead, the SURI is pretty utilitarian — it includes all the things that you’d need in a modern toothbrush, without adding any unnecessary marketing fluff.

It’s a sonic toothbrush, which is a type of electric toothbrush — they’re defined by their very, very quick vibration, which produces their signature “sonic” humming sound.

The SURI vibrates 33,000 times per minute, which actually puts it at the gentler end of the spectrum — and unlike some competitors, it doesn’t have multiple power settings.

Personally, day-to-day, I’m fine with that — I like a gentler clean, and relatively low vibrations work with the softer castor oil bristles to create a sensation that feels much kinder to my gums than other brushes I’ve used.

However, it would be nice to have a pedal-to-the-metal setting for those days when I’ve had a few glasses of red wine, or accidentally made my way through a large bag of Skittles while watching telly.

The thing about the OG SURI brush that concerned some dentists was its lack of pressure sensor, a feature that notifies you if you’re brushing too hard.

Thankfully, the new SURI 2.0 has added that feature.

There are a host of other features that make this brush extremely practical.

The first that comes to mind is the UV-C Travel Case, which comes as standard with the SURI 2.0 but is an added cost for the 1.0.

As well as protecting your toothbrush from whatever else you throw in your suitcase with it, it comes with a UV light that removes 99.9% of the bacteria on your bristles.

There’s also the month-long battery life — my partner’s electric toothbrush only lasts for a week, if she’s lucky.

Last, but certainly not least, is a tiny thing that I love — each SURI brush comes with a magnetic mount, which you can put on your bathroom mirror or wall.

That might sound pointless, but it stops your toothbrush from amassing that gross toothpaste residue at the bottom, which always makes me feel slightly nauseous.

How much is the SURI toothbrush?

The new SURI 2.0 costs £105.

That’s quite a steep increase from the original brush, which retails for just £75.

However, the 2.0 comes with a travel case as standard, which wasn’t the case for the original brush — if you wanted one, you’d have to fork out another £25.

While it’s not exactly a bargain in a world where you can pick up an electric toothbrush for £40 or £50 on Amazon, SURI markets its device as “the last toothbrush you’ll ever buy” — the toothbrush is designed to be repaired, and SURI will replace the battery for a “reasonable” fee.

The toothbrush head needs to be replaced every couple of months; you can buy a pack of three heads for £14.99, or set up a subscription to have two heads delivered every six months for £8.98 each time.

Where to buy the SURI toothbrush

The best place to get the SURI is probably the brand’s own website, where you can find both generations of the toothbrush as well as all the accessories you might want, including the travel case, chargers, magnetic mounts and toothpaste.

However, it’s also available at selected retailers, including Boots.

SURI alternatives

In terms of its environmental attributes, SURI is in a class of its own.

A few companies are attempting to make Oral care more environmental — for example, Georganics makes a sonic toothbrush with a “Zero to Landfill” scheme, through which the brand promises to responsibly dispose of your toothbrush.

However, it doesn’t have the same stylish mass appeal — it feels a bit granola and tree-hugging than SURI’s chic, Gwyneth Paltrow-friendly version of sustainability.

Plus, SURI puts a bigger emphasis on ensuring that its toothbrushes are made from environmentally friendly materials.

And, of course, if you’re not bothered about eco-credentials, there are tons of options available from normal high-street brands.

Wales knew that the opening game against Scotland would likely decide their World Cup fate.

A disappointing 38-8 defeat left an uphill task to qualify for the knockout stages, and a win on Saturday over the world’s number two ranked side Canada was required.

Sean Lynn, who took over as Wales head coach before this year’s Women’s Six Nations, made seven changes to his starting XV.

Wales’ front row had average age of just 20, with back rower Branwen Metcalfe, 18, also making her Test debut from the bench.

Despite falling to a 42-0 defeat by one of the World Cup favourites, Lynn’s youthful side showed plenty of green shoots to work with moving forward.

“I am glad the Wales women showed their respect for the jersey and the effort they are willing to put in,” former Wales captain Philippa Tuttiett told BBC’s Rugby Union Weekly.

“If you bring that to Sean Lynn with his coaching prowess then he will be able to move forward with that team.”

However, Wales must first keep an eye on the emerging nations behind them, with Fiji, who are ranked four places below them in 14th, likely to offer a tough final pool game on Saturday in Exeter.

Spain, ranked 13th, suffered a 43-27 defeat by Ireland on Sunday and are another side that are showing signs of progress.

“Let’s put Spain in the Six Nations,” former England captain Maggie Alphonsi told BBC Sport.