The company’s business model and strategy help secure an ongoing stream of income for investors.
Investors in energy stocks, such as Chevron(CVX -1.71%), always need to keep a close eye on energy commodity prices. That’s one significant reason why the stock is intriguing right now, as the share price has outperformed during a period of downward drift in oil prices. That makes it particularly appealing for passive income investors looking to buy Chevron shares for a 4.3% dividend yield.
Chevron offers protection
The chart below compares Chevron to two higher-quality energy exploration and production companies, Devon Energy and Diamondback Energy. While the others have performed in line with the declining price of oil, Chevron has outperformed.
This is a valuable demonstration of what many income-seeking investors are looking for from energy stocks. While pure-play exploration and production stocks have demonstrated a correlation with the price of oil, the benefits of Chevron being a vertically integrated oil major are becoming increasingly apparent.
This means it combines upstream operations (exploration and production) with downstream operations (refining, marketing, and chemicals), and in doing so secures the cash-flow generation to support a growing dividend.
In addition, Chevron’s $53 billion acquisition of Hess Corporation has added significant international assets (in Guyana) that tend to have a lower break-even cost (the minimum price of oil a producer can cover costs in producing oil), and adds assets in the Bakken (North Dakota) to Chevron’s existing strength in the Permian (West Texas and New Mexico).
Image source: Getty Images.
What it means to investors
While Chevron will never be completely immune from falling oil prices, its downstream assets and efforts to diversify by acquiring lower break-even-cost international assets protect it from a moderated decline, which is good news for income-seeking investors. At the same time, it has upside potential coming from a possible increase in oil prices.
Lee Samaha has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Chevron. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Before you take benefits early, understand all the drawbacks.
There’s a reason 62 tends to be a common age to sign up for Social Security — it’s the earliest age you’re allowed to take benefits. If you’re thinking of filing for Social Security at 62, it’s important to understand exactly what that means for you and your family financially. Here are three key pieces of information to keep in mind.
1. You’ll reduce your monthly benefits for life
You’re entitled to your complete Social Security benefit without a reduction at full retirement age, which is 67 for anyone born in 1960 or later. You can start getting those benefits at 62, but the Social Security Administration will reduce them if you sign up before full retirement age.
Image source: Getty Images.
One thing you must know is that any reduction in Social Security you face by claiming early is a permanent one. And if you sign up at 62 with a full retirement age of 67, you’re looking at slashing your monthly benefits by 30% for life. If you don’t have a lot of retirement savings, that’s a hit you may not be able to afford easily.
2. You’ll leave your spouse with a smaller survivor benefit
If you’re married, the financial decisions you make regarding your retirement can significantly impact your spouse. And that extends to Social Security.
If you’re the higher earner in your household, your spouse might depend heavily on Social Security survivor benefits if they end up outliving you. But if you claim benefits at 62 and reduce them substantially in the process, it could mean leaving your spouse with that much less money once you’re no longer around. That could cause them a world of stress and make it difficult for them to keep up with their expenses.
3. You’ll be subject to an earnings test if you’re still working
You don’t have to stop working to claim Social Security. And once you reach full retirement age, you can earn any amount of money from a job without it negatively impacting your Social Security benefits if you’re collecting them.
But if you claim Social Security before full retirement age, you’ll be subject to an earnings test if you’re still working. And exceeding its limit could result in withheld benefits.
In 2025, you can earn up to $23,400 without risking the withholding of your Social Security benefits. Beyond that point, you’ll have $1 in Social Security withheld per $2 of earnings.
Now you should know that if you have benefits withheld for exceeding the earnings-test limit, they’re not forfeited completely. You should get the money back in the form of larger monthly benefits once full retirement age arrives.
However, it may not make sense to reduce your benefits by claiming them at 62 only to then have most of that income source withheld due to earning too much. Run the numbers to see how much Social Security, if any, you’re likely to lose temporarily.
Though it’s easy to see why 62 is such an appealing age to file for Social Security, it may not be the optimal age for you. Or maybe it is. The key, either way, is to understand the ramifications of taking benefits that early and to make sure you’re prepared to deal with the aftermath.
The Trade Desk faces risks that could impact its long-term growth.
The Trade Desk (TTD 0.81%) is one of the most closely watched companies in the advertising technology space. Its platform helps brands and agencies buy digital ads across various channels, including connected TV (CTV), audio, display, and mobile. The company has built a reputation as a disruptor, benefiting from the secular shift away from traditional linear TV and the move toward more automated, data-driven ad buying.
However, even great companies face risks, and investors should carefully weigh these before investing. In The Trade Desk’s case, two stand out: ongoing operational challenges that could slow growth, and a valuation that leaves little room for error.
Image source: Getty Images.
The Trade Desk faces risks that could impact its long-term growth
On the surface, The Trade Desk looks unstoppable. It continues to win share as advertisers reallocate budgets from traditional channels toward digital and CTV. However, beneath that momentum, the company is facing a few operational hurdles.
The biggest one involves its UID2 identity solution. With third-party cookies being phased out by Google in 2025, The Trade Desk has promoted UID2 as an industry standard to enable targeted advertising while preserving user privacy. Adoption has been broad and partners such as Walt Disney, Fox, Roku, and many publishers have integrated UID2. Still, it’s far from guaranteed that UID2 will emerge as the universal replacement. Google has its own Privacy Sandbox framework, and other walled gardens, such as Apple, are unlikely to adopt UID2.
This means The Trade Desk’s future growth in open-internet advertising depends heavily on how well UID2 gains traction versus rival identity solutions. If adoption slows or if regulators impose stricter privacy rules, the company’s targeting capabilities — and therefore its value proposition to advertisers — could weaken.
Another challenge is the competitive intensity in connected TV. While CTV is The Trade Desk’s fastest-growing segment, competition is intensifying as streamers like Netflix, Amazon, and Disney ramp up their advertising businesses. These platforms are building in-house tech and are under pressure to maximize revenue per user, which could limit the scale of inventory they make available through third-party demand-side platforms like The Trade Desk. In other words, if major streamers decide to keep more ad buying within their ecosystems, The Trade Desk’s CTV runway could narrow.
Internally, the company is undergoing one of the most significant adjustments with significant changes in the senior management team. For example, in the second quarter of 2025 alone , it saw the hiring of a new CFO and a new board member with expertise in data, AI, and advertising. Managing this transition while scaling the business is not an easy task.
Together, these operational challenges may derail The Trade Desk from its historically high growth trajectory.
The stock price isn’t a bargain despite the uncertainties ahead
The second red flag that investors need to consider is valuation. Even after a sharp pullback in recent months, The Trade Desk trades at approximately 63 times earnings and nearly 10 times sales. That’s an expensive price tag for a company operating in a cyclical industry where growth depends on macro ad spending trends.
To be fair, The Trade Desk has earned its premium multiple. It has consistently grown its revenue , maintained profitability, and adjusted its strategies as the industry has developed — introducing platforms such as Kokai AI, UID2, and others.
Additionally, it operates in an industry with a global total addressable market (TAM) of nearly $1 trillion . Within this industry, connected TV (CTV) is one of the fastest-growing segments — an area where the company has invested heavily over the years to capitalize on the tailwind.
But here’s the thing. Even if The Trade Desk continues to march ahead, sustaining its current valuation requires near-flawless execution. Any stumble — whether slower UID2 adoption, increased competition in CTV, or a cyclical ad slowdown — could trigger a sharp contraction in multiple.
That’s the risk of buying in at a premium: The business can do well, but the stock may not if expectations are too high.
What does it mean for investors?
The Trade Desk has undeniable strengths: It’s founder-led and well-positioned for the secular shift toward programmatic advertising.
However, it’s essential to balance the bullish case with the risks. Operational challenges around identity and CTV competition could complicate execution. And with the stock still trading at a steep valuation, investors aren’t getting much of a discount for taking on that uncertainty.
If you’re considering buying The Trade Desk stock today, the prudent move may be to wait for a better entry point or clearer signs of UID2’s industry dominance before committing your hard-earned capital.
Lawrence Nga has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon, Netflix, Roku, The Trade Desk, and Walt Disney. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Archer is positioned to be a leader in the emerging air taxi market.
The low-altitude economy is on the verge of rocketing higher over the next few decades. Bank of America sees the global adoption of electric vehicle take-off and landing (eVTOL) aircraft to increase by 62% by 2030.
While Joby Aviation is one way to profit from this opportunity, it’s worth noting that Cathie Wood of Ark Invest has placed her bet on Archer Aviation(ACHR 2.93%) for the Ark Innovation ETF, which holds almost 18 million shares. There’s one reason that may explain why Wood is bullish, and it’s also why I hold shares — and that’s a steady flow of positive developments in the past year that position Archer to be a leader in the air taxi market.
The Midnight model eVTOL aircraft. Image source: Archer Aviation.
Why buy Archer Aviation stock
Over the past year, there have been a number of announcements that show the company progressing toward receiving the required certifications and launching commercial operations. This has had a significant impact on the stock price, which has doubled over the past year despite the company not generating significant revenue yet.
Archer has previously announced partnerships with United Airlines and Southwest Airlines to operate air taxi networks across major cities in the U.S. It also has financial backing from Stellantis and other investors as it works toward its goal of manufacturing 50 aircraft per year. In its second-quarter earnings report, Archer reported there were six Midnight aircraft in different production stages, with three in final assembly at its Georgia and Silicon Valley facilities.
In June, Archer, along with the Federal Aviation Administration and the U.S. Department of Transportation, announced an alliance with the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand in streamlining the certification and commercial launch of eVTOL aircraft.
Finally, Archer Aviation was recently named the official air taxi service for the 2028 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, which will be valuable marketing in demonstrating its capabilities. Given these developments, Archer Aviation is a potential breakout growth stock to watch over the next year.
Bank of America is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. John Ballard has positions in Archer Aviation. The Motley Fool recommends Southwest Airlines and Stellantis. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
When the fires this year upended Los Angeles and put into question what it even means to return to normal, I was reminded of a chapter in “California Against the Sea” that had expanded my own understanding of what it takes to truly adapt our built environment — and to reimagine the places that we have come to love and call home.
This chapter, which opens with a radical shoreline reconfiguration just north of San Francisco, came not without controversy, but it provided a glimpse into what compromise might need to look like for so many communities struggling to keep up with climate change. Rather than hold the line with increasing futility, here was a humbling example of what can be possible when we transcend the throes of politics — and when we choose to set aside our differences and think beyond just reacting to the same disasters time and time again.
Since the book was published in 2023, the bridge described in the following excerpt has been completed, and the creek is finally free. Accommodating nature in this way called for some tough and unfamiliar changes, but go out to the beach today, and you can see the marsh starting to recover and the entire ecosystem gently resetting with the rhythms of the sea.
So much of the climate debate is still framed around what it is that we have to give up, but does it have to be this way? Rather than confront these decisions as though it’s our doom, can we embrace change and reconsider each effort to adapt as an opportunity — an opportunity to come together and build more bridges to the future?
A few winding turns past Bodega Bay, about an hour north of San Francisco, relentless waves pound against a stretch of coastline in dire need of re-imagining. Gleason Beach, once reminiscent of a northern version of Malibu, is now mostly just a beach in name. Sand emerges only during the lowest of tides. Bits of concrete and rebar are all that remain of 11 clifftop homes that once faced the sea. A graveyard of seawalls, smashed into pieces, litters the shore. Here along the foggy bluffs of the Sonoma coast, the edge of the continent feels more like the edge of the world — a window into the future if California does not change course.
Los Angeles knows how to weather a crisis — or two or three. Angelenos are tapping into that resilience, striving to build a city for everyone.
These wave-cut cliffs, a brittle mélange of ancient claystone and shale, have been eroding on average about a foot a year, exacerbated since the 1980s by a hardened shoreline, intensifying El Niños and, now, sea level rise. With the beach underwater, the seawalls destroyed and so many homes surrendered, the pressure is now on Highway 1 to hold the line between land and sea. Year after year, residents have watched the waves carve away at the two-lane road — their only way to get to work, their only way to evacuate, their only way to reach all the rocky coves, beaches and seaside campgrounds that make this coast a marvel.
Broken concrete is all that’s left of a number of clifftop homes at Gleason Beach on the Sonoma Coast, pictured here in 2019.
(Carolyn Cole/ Los Angeles Times)
So, with every storm and every knock from the ocean, officials have scrambled to save the highway, pouring millions of tax dollars into a vicious cycle of sudden collapses and emergency repairs. From 2004 to 2018 alone, state transportation officials spent about $10 million in emergency defenses and failed repairs. In 2019, almost half a mile had to be reduced to one lane.
This lifeline for the region now hangs inches from the edge. The once spectacular coastline had seemingly morphed overnight — an apocalyptic transformation, decades in the making, seen with stark clarity now that orange caution tape and makeshift traffic lights mark what’s left of the shore.
“This is what unmanaged retreat looks like, and it is quite frankly a hot mess of septic systems, old house parts and armoring that have fallen into the intertidal zone with no real mechanism for cleaning it up,” Sonoma County supervisor Lynda Hopkins declared. “If we don’t start planning ahead and taking proactive measures, Mother Nature will make the decisions for us.”
With the realities of climate change looming ever closer, California transportation officials agreed it was time to try something different: make peace with the sea and move the crumbling highway more than 350 feet inland. They knew nailing down the details would be fraught, but, if done right, this would be the first radical effort by the state to plan for a reimagined coast — a coast that could support California into the next century. It was the rare managed retreat proposal that intentionally sought to both raise and relocate critical infrastructure far enough from the shore to make room for the next 100 years of rising water.
Compromise wasn’t easy. Officials studied more than 20 alternatives that tried to balance safety codes, traffic needs, fragile habitats, public access to the coast and other competing requirements that were tricky to meet given the topography. There were also all the nearby property owners who needed persuading, not to mention a skeptical, conservation-minded community that was averse to saving a human-altered shoreline with more human alterations. They ran into every argument and counterargument that have tugged, pulled and paralyzed other communities.
At its heart this project, like so many attempts along the California coast, called for a reckoning over what was worth saving — and what was worth sacrificing — and whether it was possible to redesign a treasured landscape so that it survives into the future.
Book cover for “California Against the Sea” by Rosanna Xia
(Heyday Books)
“It seems daunting; it’s a lot of change to cope with, but it’s also an opportunity for communities to think about, ‘What are the coastal resources we want to have access to fifty, one hundred years from now?’” said Tami Grove, who oversees transportation projects for the California Coastal Commission and spent years reconciling all the emotional meetings, the disagreements, the many stops and stalls and hand-wringing compromises. “It gets lost, sometimes, when people are worried about everything that we’re going to lose to sea level rise — but there are things that we’re going to be able to choose and enhance and design into the future if we start planning now.”
In what many described as a major coup in government bureaucracy, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the coastal commission and county leaders set aside their differences to come up with a new solution together. By November 2020, they had hammered out a plan to relocate almost one mile of the highway — most notably with a new 850-foot-long bridge spanning Scotty Creek, a degraded stream that, choked for decades by the highway’s current configuration, rarely reached the ocean anymore. Rather than agonize over how to restore the landscape to some former, unobtainable baseline of “natural,” officials unanimously agreed that this bold re-imagining of the coast was the best way forward among no perfect options.
The concrete bridge (a monstrous overpass or a reasonable compromise, depending on who’s talking) will at least allow Scotty Creek to flow freely into the ocean again — making room for more red-legged frogs, Myrtle’s silverspot butterflies, and the passage of steelhead trout and coho salmon. Officials reasoned that elevating the highway would avoid paving over what’s left of the wetlands, which were already in desperate need of healing. By rerouting traffic onto a bridge, these drowning habitats would have the space to recover and migrate inland as the sea moved in.
State transportation officials also agreed, as part of the $73 million project, to pay $5 million to help clean up the mess of abandoned homes and failed road repairs. An additional $6.5 million will go toward wetland, creek and prairie restoration. Some of the old highway will be converted into a public coastal trail, and visitors will have access to a new parking area, as well as a beach that was once limited by private property.
Caltrans also set aside money to negotiate and acquire land from three private properties, including oceanfront portions of a historic ranch that will be most impacted by the realigned highway. Once completed, much of the open space will be transferred to Sonoma County to manage on behalf of the public.
This all came as a shock at first for Philip and Roberta Ballard, who own and live on the ranch, but they said they’ve come to understand the necessity of this project. The bridge still feels way too big — especially for this rural stretch of paradise that first captured their hearts more than two decades ago — but after years of meetings, questions and debating each trade-off, the retired couple decided to turn their energies toward making sure Scotty Creek got restored as part of the deal.
The creek, the largest watershed between Salmon Creek and the Russian River, has needed help since before they purchased the ranch, they said. In a past life, steelhead trout and coho salmon thrived in this stream. The once-abundant fish disappeared after the concrete culvert, installed in 1952 to support the highway, blocked their ability to migrate between fresh- and saltwater. The brackish habitat drowned over the decades. Then the creek, swollen after a series of big storms in the 1980s, flooded the lower plain. The stream banks were denuded of vegetation and the riffle crests obliterated as the choked stream tried to reach the sea.
Since 2004, the Ballards, both professors emeriti of pediatrics at UC San Francisco, have been piecing together ways to restore the creek, one small project at a time. Full restoration would require grading and reshaping the riverbanks, bringing back the native vegetation, improving water flow and re-creating the pools that once provided shelter to juvenile fish. The $6.5 million that Caltrans promised as part of the final deal will go a long way, they said, to nursing this entire ecosystem back to life.
“A lot of our efforts have gone into trying to make the best out of something that is necessary,” Roberta Ballard said. “We’ve arrived at feeling reasonably good about getting the best mitigation we can get for this region and getting something reasonably positive out of it.”
Construction crews work on building a new bridge over Scotty Creek, as part of Caltrans’ Gleason Beach Roadway Realignment Project.
(John Huseby / Caltrans)
When we don’t understand and don’t allow for the ocean’s ways, we end up with homes perched on crumbling cliffs and seawalls still making a stand. Guided by a few mere decades of history and a narrow understanding of the California shore, many today know only how to preserve the version of the coast they learned to love. Rather than imagine a different way to live, we cling to the fragility of what we still have and account for only what we consider lost. Even remembering how wide a beach used to be, or how the cliffs once withstood the tide, glorifies the notion that resilience is measured by our ability to remain unchanged.
We fail to see how we’ve replaced entire ecological systems with our own hardened habitats, and then altered the shoreline even more once the shore began to disappear. Neither replicating the past nor holding on to the present is going to get us to the future that we need. Learning from the recurring cycles of nature, listening to the knowledge gained with each flood and storm, adapting and choosing to transform — this is what it means to persevere. Change, in the end, has been the only constant in our battle for permanence. Change is the only way California will learn how to live with, not on, this beautiful, vanishing coastline that so many people settled and still wish to call home.
Stefan Galvez-Abadia, Caltrans’s district division chief of environmental planning and engineering, is now attempting with his team to design a prettier bridge at Gleason Beach, one more fitting for the rural landscape. They’ve studied the arched columns of Bixby Creek Bridge on the Big Sur coast and other popular landmarks that have become iconic over time. They’ve conducted surveys on what color to paint the bridge — some shade of gray or brown, for example, or a more distinct hue like that of the Golden Gate Bridge. Donne Brownsey, who served as vice chair of the Coastal Commission at the time, remarked that the project reminded her of a concrete beam bridge in Mendocino County that spans the mouth of the Ten Mile River, just north of where she lives in Fort Bragg. “It was a new bridge, it caused a lot of consternation, but I didn’t know that the first few times I went over it — I would look forward to that part of the drive, because I could see the whole estuary to the west, and I could see the rivershed to the east,” she said. “You don’t even really see the bridge anymore because the swallows now all nest there, and it’s just part of nature.”
The bridge at Gleason Beach, facing similar design constraints as the Ten Mile Bridge, also has to be massive — a counter-intuitive twist to what one might think it means to accommodate the environment. Engineers had at first tried more minimal options — a shorter bridge, thinner columns, a less intrusive height — but many were not large enough in size or distance to outlast the coastal erosion projected for the next 100 years. And to give the wetlands enough space to grow back, the highway needed to be elevated at a landscape-wide scale.
The completed bridge and realignment of Highway 1 can now be seen at Gleason Beach, about an hour north of San Francisco.
(Caltrans)
Despite so many years of seminars and talks about climate change adaptation, turning an abstract concept like managed retreat into reality has been a delicate exercise in compromise, Galvez-Abadia said. There were few case studies to turn to, and each one he examined dealt with an increasingly complicated set of trade-offs.
“You don’t have many choices when it comes to sea level rise,” he said, flipping through almost two dozen renderings his team had tried. “Whichever way you choose, you’re going to have some kind of impact. These are the difficult decisions that we will all have to make as a region, as a community, for generations to come.”
As he filed away his notes and prepared to break ground, he reflected once more on all the years it took to reach this first milestone. The process wasn’t easy. A lot of people are still frustrated. Even more are disappointed. Many tough property negotiations still lay ahead, but he hoped, at least, to see the wetlands and creek recover beneath the bridge one day. If the native plants reemerge, the salmon return, and there still remains a coast that families could safely access and enjoy, perhaps this new highway — however bold, however different — could show California that it is possible, that it isn’t absurd, to build toward a future where nature and modern human needs could finally coexist.
Because that’s how the Dodgers started their trade deadline activity late Wednesday night.
On the eve of MLB’s annual trade deadline (which is Thursday at 3 p.m. PDT), the Dodgers were the tertiary party in a three-team trade with the Cincinnati Reds and Tampa Bay Rays.
While the biggest piece in the deal — starting pitcher Zack Littell — went from Tampa Bay to Cincinnati, the Dodgers were included in a swap of some lesser-name players.
Minor league catcher Hunter Feduccia, a longtime Dodgers farmhand having a nice season with triple-A Oklahoma City, was sent to Tampa Bay.
In return, the Dodgers received pitching prospect Adam Serwinowski from the Reds, as well as reliever Paul Gervase and catcher Ben Rortvedt from the Rays, according to multiple people with knowledge of the situation not authorized to speak publicly.
Serwinowski is the most intriguing name the Dodgers acquired. A 21-year-old left-hander who was ranked as the No. 10 prospect in the Reds’ farm system by MLB Pipeline, the former 15th-round draft pick has been a favorite of Dodgers’ evaluators for a while, according to another person with knowledge of the team’s thinking.
While Serwinowski has a 4.84 ERA in high-A this season, the Dodgers are excited by his potential and add him to a farm system that is lacking the depth of impact pitching prospects it usually touts.
Gervase is a 25-year-old reliever who debuted in the majors this year with the Rays, posting a 4.26 ERA in five outings this year.
Rortvedt is a 27-year-old journeyman catcher who will help provide organizational depth in Feduccia’s absence, alongside current triple-A backstops Chris Okey and Chuckie Robinson.
For a team that has been linked to some of the bigger names on this year’s trade market, it was far from the blockbuster many fans have been waiting on.
Granted, the Dodgers are still expected to be active on Thursday.
Their need for a reliever remains, even though they remained idle on Wednesday as other top options, from Jhoan Durán to Ryan Helsley to Tyler Rogers, were dealt elsewhere.
The club is still hoping to add another hitter to their lineup too, with an upgrade in the outfield (especially defensively) seen as a priority, according to a person with knowledge of the club’s thinking.
Whether the Dodgers can land the impact additions they seek, in what has been a seller’s market defined by high acquisition costs to this point, remains to be seen.
But at least they won’t go into deadline day without having made any deals, with Wednesday night’s late-night transaction expected to be the first of several moves they make ahead of Thursday’s trade cutoff.
