Finance

Many stocks have seen double-digit returns since Election Day.
That’s largely due to a combination of likely policy stances from the incoming Trump administration and positive quarterly earnings reports, experts said.
President-elect Donald Trump will likely back deregulation and adopt a less stringent stance on mergers and acquisitions, experts said.
Tesla stock also got an “Elon Musk premium,” one analyst said.

Stock traders on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange.
Michael M. Santiago | Getty Images News | Getty Images

Many large U.S. companies have seen their stocks swell since the presidential election.
The top 10 performing stocks in the S&P 500 index saw returns of 18% or more since Election Day, according to data provided by S&P Global Market Intelligence, which analyzed returns based on closing prices from Nov. 5 to Nov. 20.

Two companies — Axon Enterprise (AXON), which provides law-enforcement technology, and Tesla (TSLA), the electric-vehicle maker led by Elon Musk, an advisor to President-elect Donald Trump — saw their stocks gain more than 35%, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.
By contrast, the S&P 500 gained about 2% over the same period.

‘Usually a bad idea’ to buy on short-term gain

Investors should be cautious about buying individual stocks based on short-term boosts, said Jeremy Goldberg, a certified financial planner, portfolio manager and research analyst at Professional Advisory Services, Inc., which ranked No. 37 on CNBC’s annual Financial Advisor 100 list.
“It’s usually a bad idea,” Goldberg said. “Momentum is a powerful force in the market, but relying solely on short-term price moves as an investment strategy is risky.”
Investors should understand what’s driving the movement and whether the factors pushing up a stock price are sustainable, Goldberg said.

Why did these stocks outperform?

Lofty stock returns were partly driven by Trump administration policy stances expected to benefit certain companies and industries, investment experts said.
Deregulation and a softer view toward mergers and acquisitions are two “key” themes driving bullish sentiment after Trump’s win, said Jacob Manoukian, head of U.S. investment strategy at J.P. Morgan Private Bank.

Relying solely on short-term price moves as an investment strategy is risky.

Jeremy Goldberg
portfolio manager and research analyst at Professional Advisory Services, Inc.

Additionally, U.S. regulators will likely be much less stringent about allowing potential mergers during Trump’s second term, experts said.
Companies in the streaming ecosystem — like Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), which owns the Max streaming service, and Disney+ owner The Walt Disney Co. (DIS) — may be benefactors of looser rules around consolidation, they said.

Rosy earnings and AI

For some stocks, outperformance was tied to rosy quarterly earnings results or guidance that some companies reported around or after Election Day, experts said.
Many such businesses cited artificial intelligence as a growth driver.
For example, Palantir Technologies (PLTR), cited “unprecedented” demand for its AI platform in the third quarter, helping deliver “exceptionally strong” earnings, Treasurer and CFO David Glazer told investors Nov. 4.

Likewise, Axon beat analysts’ estimates in its Nov. 7 earnings results, with officials touting its “AI era plan” and raising earnings guidance, Goldberg said.
Axon and Palantir stocks were up 38% and 22%, respectively, from Nov. 5 to Nov. 20, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence.
Some companies benefited from a combination of policy and earnings, experts said.

Rows of servers fill Data Hall B at Facebook’s Fort Worth Data Center in Texas.
Paul Moseley/Fort Worth Star-Telegram/Tribune News Service via Getty Images

Take Vistra Corp. (VST), an energy provider, for example. The company’s stock jumped 27% after Election Day.
Vistra is in talks with large data centers — or “hyperscalers” — in Texas, Pennsylvania and Ohio to build or upgrade gas and nuclear plants, Stacey Doré, Vistra’s chief strategy and sustainability officer, said on the company’s Q3 earnings call Nov. 7.
Tech companies are building more and more such data centers to fuel the AI revolution — and need to source increasing amounts of energy to run them.

The ‘Elon Musk premium’

And then there’s the Elon Musk factor.
Tesla’s stock got an “Elon Musk premium” from Trump’s victory, said Goldberg of Professional Advisory Services.
Musk, Tesla’s CEO, was one of Trump’s top campaign backers. Trump tapped him to co-lead a new Department of Government Efficiency. Shares of the electric-vehicle maker soared 14% the day after the election and almost 30% by week’s end.

President-elect Donald Trump and Elon Musk talk ring side during the UFC 309 event at Madison Square Garden on Nov. 16, 2024 in New York.
Chris Unger | Ufc | Getty Images

But Tesla stock has additional tailwinds, experts said.
For one, Trump wants to end a $7,500 federal tax credit for EVs. Scrapping that policy is expected to hurt Tesla’s EV rivals.
Tesla has also been developing technology for driverless vehicles. In Tesla’s recent earnings call, Musk said he’d use his influence in Trump’s administration to establish a “federal approval process for autonomous vehicles.” More

Thousands of Americans will receive little or nothing from savings accounts that were locked during the collapse of fintech middleman Synapse.
Customers believed the accounts were backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.
CNBC spoke to a dozen customers caught in the predicament, people who have lost sums ranging from $7,000 to well over $200,000.
While there’s not yet a full tally of those left shortchanged, at fintech Yotta alone, 13,725 customers say they are being offered a combined $11.8 million despite putting in $64.9 million in deposits.

Oscar Wong | Moment | Getty Images

For 15 years, former Texas schoolteacher Kayla Morris put every dollar she could save into a home for her growing family.
When she and her husband sold the house last year, they stowed away the proceeds, $282,153.87, in what they thought of as a safe place — an account at the savings startup Yotta held at a real bank.

Morris, like thousands of other customers, was snared in the collapse of a behind-the-scenes fintech firm called Synapse and has been locked out of her account for six months as of November. She held out hope that her money was still secure. Then she learned how much Evolve Bank & Trust, the lender where her funds were supposed to be held, was prepared to return to her.
“We were informed last Monday that Evolve was only going to pay us $500 out of that $280,000,” Morris said during a court hearing last week, her voice wavering. “It’s just devastating.”
The crisis started in May when a dispute between Synapse and Evolve Bank over customer balances boiled over and the fintech middleman turned off access to a key system used to process transactions. Synapse helped fintech startups like Yotta and Juno, which are not banks, offer checking accounts and debit cards by hooking them up with small lenders like Evolve.
In the immediate aftermath of Synapse’s bankruptcy, which happened after an exodus of its fintech clients, a court-appointed trustee found that up to $96 million of customer funds was missing.
The mystery of where those funds are hasn’t been solved, despite six months of court-mediated efforts between the four banks involved. That’s mostly because the estate of Andreessen Horowitz-backed Synapse doesn’t have the money to hire an outside firm to perform a full reconciliation of its ledgers, according to Jelena McWilliams, the bankruptcy trustee.

But what is now clear is that regular Americans like Morris are bearing the brunt of that shortfall and will receive little or nothing from savings accounts that they believed were backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.
The losses demonstrate the risks of a system where customers didn’t have direct relationships with banks, instead relying on startups to keep track of their funds, who offloaded that responsibility onto middlemen like Synapse.

Zach Jacobs, 37, of Tampa, Florida helped form a group called Fight For Our Funds after losing more than $94,000 that he had in a fintech savings account called Yotta.
Courtesy: Zach Jacobs

‘Reverse bank robbery’

There are thousands of others like Morris. While there’s not yet a full tally of those left shortchanged, at Yotta alone, 13,725 customers say they are being offered a combined $11.8 million despite putting in $64.9 million in deposits, according to figures shared by Yotta co-founder and CEO Adam Moelis.
CNBC spoke to a dozen customers caught in this predicament, people who are owed sums ranging from $7,000 to well over $200,000.
From FedEx drivers to small business owners, teachers to dentists, they described the loss of years of savings after turning to fintechs like Yotta for the higher interest rates on offer, for innovative features or because they were turned away from traditional banks.
One Yotta customer, Zach Jacobs, logged onto Evolve’s website on Nov. 4 to find he was getting back just $128.68 of the $94,468.92 he had deposited — and he decided to act.

Arrows pointing outwards

Zach Jacobs decided to act after logging onto Evolve’s website on Nov. 4 to find he was getting just $128.68 of his $94,468.92 in deposits.
Courtesy: Zach Jacobs

The 37-year-old Tampa, Florida-based business owner began organizing with other victims online, creating a board of volunteers for a group called Fight For Our Funds. It’s his hope that they gain attention from press and politicians.
So far, 3,454 people have signed on, saying they’ve lost a combined $30.4 million.
“When you tell people about this, it’s like, ‘There’s no way this can happen,'” Jacobs said. “A bank just robbed us. This is the first reverse bank robbery in the history of America.”
Andrew Meloan, a chemical engineer from Chicago, said he had hoped to see the return of $200,000 he’d deposited with Yotta. Early this month, he received an unexpected PayPal remittance from Evolve for $5.
“When I signed up, they gave me an Evolve routing and account number,” Meloan said. “Now they’re saying they only have $5 of my money, and the rest is someplace else. I feel like I’ve been conned.”

A bank just robbed us. This is the first reverse bank robbery in the history of America.”

Zach Jacobs
Yotta customer

Cracks in the system

Unlike meme stocks or crypto bets, in which the user naturally assumes some risk, most customers viewed funds held in Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.-backed accounts as the safest place to keep their money. People relied on accounts powered by Synapse for everyday expenses like buying groceries and paying rent, or for saving for major life events like home purchases or surgeries.
Several people CNBC interviewed said signing up seemed like a good bet since Yotta and other fintechs advertised that deposits were FDIC-insured through Evolve.
“We were assured that this was just a savings account,” Morris said during last week’s hearing. “We are not risk-takers, we’re not gamblers.”
A Synapse contract that customers received after signing up for checking accounts stated that user money was insured by the FDIC for up to $250,000, according to a version seen by CNBC.
“According to the FDIC, no depositor has ever lost a penny of FDIC-insured funds,” the 26 page contract states.

‘We are responsible’

Abandoned by U.S. regulators who have so far declined to act, they are left with few clear options to recoup their money.
In June, the FDIC made it clear that its insurance fund doesn’t cover the failure of nonbanks like Synapse, and that in the event of such a firm’s failure, recovering funds through the courts wasn’t guaranteed.
The next month, the Federal Reserve said that as Evolve’s primary federal regulator it would monitor the bank’s progress “in returning all customer funds” to users.
“We are responsible for working to ensure that the bank operates in a safe and sound manner and complies with applicable laws, including laws protecting consumers,” Fed general counsel Mark E. Van Der Weide said in a letter.
In September, the FDIC proposed a new rule that would force banks to keep detailed records for customers of fintech apps, improving the chances that they qualify for coverage in a future calamity and cutting the risk that funds would go missing.
McWilliams, herself a former FDIC chair during the first Trump presidency, told the California judge handling the Synapse bankruptcy case last week she was “disheartened” that every financial regulator has decided not to help.
The FDIC and Fed declined to comment for this story, and McWilliams didn’t respond to emails.

Jelena McWilliams, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, testifies during a House Financial Services Committee hearing in Rayburn Building titled “Oversight of Prudential Regulators: Ensuring the Safety, Soundness and Accountability of Megabanks and Other Depository Institutions,” on Thursday, May 16, 2019.
Tom Williams | CQ-Roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

Winners and losers

Things hadn’t always seemed so dire. Early in the proceedings, McWilliams suggested to Judge Martin Barash that customers be given a partial payment, essentially spreading the pain among everyone.
But that would’ve required more coordination between Evolve and the other lenders that held customer funds than what ultimately happened.
As the hearings dragged on, the three other institutions, AMG National Trust, Lineage Bank and American Bank, began disbursing the funds they had, while Evolve took months to perform what it initially said would be a comprehensive reconciliation.
Around the time Evolve completed its efforts in October, it said it could only figure out the user funds it held, not the location of the missing funds. That’s at least partly because of “very large bulk transfers” of funds without identification of who owned the money, a lawyer for Evolve testified last week.
As a result, the bankruptcy process has minted relative winners and losers.
Some end users recently received all their funds back, while others, like Indiana FedEx driver Natasha Craft, received none, she told CNBC.

Natasha Craft, a 25-year-old FedEx driver from Mishawaka, Indiana. She has been locked out of her Yotta banking account since May 11.
Courtesy: Natasha Craft

As of Nov. 12, the four banks released $193 million to customers, or more than 85% of what they held earlier in the year.
The Nov. 13 hearing has provided the only public venue for victims to register their distress; dozens of victims queued up in the hopes they could testify about receiving a tiny fraction of what they’re owed. The event went longer than three hours.
“You can’t imagine the panic when it said I was getting 81 cents,” said Andreatte Caliguire, who said she is owed $22,000. “I have no money, I have no path forward, I have nothing.”

‘Nothing optimistic’

Evolve says that “the vast majority” of funds held for Yotta and other customers were moved to other banks in October and November of 2023 on directions from Synapse, according to an Evolve spokesman. 
“Where those end user funds went after that is an important question, but unfortunately not one Evolve can answer with the data it currently has,” the spokesman said.
Yotta says that Evolve has given fintech firms and the trustee no information about how it determined payouts, “despite acknowledging in court that a shortfall existed at Evolve prior to October 2023,” according to a spokesman for the startup, who noted that several executives have recently left the bank. “We hope regulators take notice and act.”
In statements released ahead of this month’s hearing, Evolve said that other banks refused to participate in its efforts to create a master ledger, while AMG and Lineage said that Evolve’s implication that they had the missing funds was “irresponsible and disingenuous.”
As the banks and other parties hurl accusations at each other and lawsuits pile up, including pending class-action efforts, the window for cooperation is rapidly closing, Barash said last week.
“As time goes by, my impression is that unless the banks that are involved can sort this out voluntarily, it may not get sorted out,” Barash said. “There’s nothing optimistic about what I’m telling you.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

The founder of the first gold-tracking ETF is still bullish on the commodity two decades later.
“Things are looking good for the rest of this year and for next year,” George Milling-Stanley told CNBC’s “ETF Edge” this week.

The State Street chief gold strategist highlighted demand from both central banks and individual investors in emerging markets, such as India and China, as major tailwinds for the precious metal.
Even the postelection pullback in gold futures and the SPDR Gold Shares ETF (GLD) hasn’t tarnished the record run this year.
Since the Nov. 5 election, “investors have gone gung-ho on risk-on assets,” Milling-Stanley said. “This is why we’ve seen the stock market go up dramatically, why we’ve seen the cryptocurrencies go up dramatically.”
But the precious metal, and in turn, the GLD ETF, are “starting to claw back some of the lost ground,” Milling-Stanley said.

Stock chart icon

GLD chart since inception

The launch of the GLD ETF changed the game for commodity ownership when it launched 20 years ago. 

Since then, investment in gold has shifted away from jewelry and into bullion and ETFs as demand for the precious metal has jumped. Milling-Stanley describes the increased investor demand as a “huge change” to the commodity investment landscape — and to portfolio management as a whole.
Todd Sohn, ETF and technical strategist at Strategas, says GLD brought more investors into gold because of the broader access ETFs can offer.
“No matter what your end game is, GLD allowed you to add something to your portfolio besides an equity and a fixed income instrument, so you can get diversification,” said Sohn.
Since its inception, GLD is up 451%. It is up 29% in 2024. 
Disclaimer More

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday issued a finalized version of a rule saying it will soon supervise nonbank firms that offer financial services likes payments and wallet apps.
That would include payments services from Apple, Google and Amazon, as well as fintech firms including PayPal and Block and peer-to-peer services Venmo and Zelle.
The most popular apps covered by the rule collectively process more than 13 billion consumer payments a year, the CFPB said.

Rohit Chopra, director of the CFPB, testifies during the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee hearing titled “The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Semi-Annual Report to Congress,” in the Dirksen Building on Nov. 30, 2023.
Tom Williams | Cq-roll Call, Inc. | Getty Images

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday issued a finalized version of a rule saying it will soon supervise nonbank firms that offer financial services likes payments and wallet apps.
Tech giants and payments firms that handle at least 50 million transactions annually will fall under the review, which is meant to ensure the newer entrants adhere to the laws that banks and credit unions abide by, the CFPB said in a release.

The CFPB said that seven nonbanks qualify for the new scrutiny. Payments services from Apple, Google and Amazon, as well as fintech firms including PayPal and Block and peer-to-peer services Venmo and Zelle are impacted by the change.
While the CFPB already had some authority over digital payment companies because of its oversight of electronic fund transfers, the new rule allows it to treat tech companies more like banks. It makes the firms subject to “proactive examinations” to ensure legal compliance, enabling it to demand records and interview employees.
“Digital payments have gone from novelty to necessity and our oversight must reflect this reality,” said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. “The rule will help to protect consumer privacy, guard against fraud, and prevent illegal account closures.”
A year ago, the CFPB said it wanted to extend its oversight to tech and fintech companies that offer financial services but that have sidestepped more scrutiny by partnering with banks. Americans are increasingly using payment apps as de facto bank accounts, storing cash and making everyday purchases through their mobile phones.
The most popular apps covered by the rule collectively process more than 13 billion consumer payments a year, and have gained “particularly strong adoption” among low- and middle-income users, the CFPB said Thursday.

“What began as a convenient alternative to cash has evolved into a critical financial tool, processing over a trillion dollars in payments between consumers and their friends, families, and businesses,” the regulator said.
The initial proposal would’ve subjected companies that process at least 5 million transactions annually to some of the same examinations that the CFPB conducts on banks and credit unions. That threshold got raised to 50 million transactions in the final rule, limiting the expanded powers from roughly 17 companies to just seven, the agency said Thursday.
Payment apps that only work at a particular retailer, like Starbucks, are excluded from the rule.
The new CFPB rule is one of the rare instances where the U.S. banking industry publicly supported the regulator’s actions; banks have long felt that tech firms making inroads in financial services ought to be more scrutinized.
The rule “marks an important step forward for the CFPB to regularly ensure that non-bank market participants actually comply with their obligations to consumers,” Lindsey Johnson, president of the Consumer Bankers Association, said in an email.
The CFPB said the rule will take effect 30 days after its publication in the Federal Register.
It is not known whether the incoming Trump administration will decide to change or kill the new rule, but it is possible that expanded oversight of tech companies aligns with future CFPB leadership.

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO More

“I am gravely concerned that the rise of tariffs puts us on a slippery slope towards crony capitalism,” billionaire investor Ken Griffin said at the Economic Club of New York.
The Citadel founder said domestic companies could enjoy a short-term benefit of having their competitors taken away.
Longer term, however, it does more harm to corporate America and the economy as companies lose competitiveness and productivity, he said.

Ken Griffin, chief executive officer and founder of Citadel Advisors LLC, speaks during an Economic Club of New York event in New York, US, on Thursday, Nov. 21, 2024.
Yuki Iwamura | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Citadel CEO Ken Griffin issued a warning against the steep tariffs President-elect Donald Trump vowed to implement, saying crony capitalism could be a consequence.
“I am gravely concerned that the rise of tariffs puts us on a slippery slope towards crony capitalism,” the billionaire investor said Thursday at the Economic Club of New York.

The Citadel founder said domestic companies could enjoy a short-term benefit of having their competitors taken away. Longer term, however, it does more harm to corporate America and the economy as companies lose competitiveness and productivity, he said.
Crony capitalism is an economic system marked by close, mutually advantageous relationships between business leaders and government officials.
“Those same companies that enjoy that momentary sugar rush of having their competitors removed from the battlefield soon become complacent, soon take for granted their newfound economic superiority, and frankly, they become less competitive on both the world stage and less competitive at meeting the needs of the American consumer,” Griffin said at the event.
Trump made universal tariffs a core tenet of his economic campaign pitch, floating a 20% levy on all imports from all countries with a specifically harsh 60% rate for Chinese goods.
The protectionist trade policy could make production of goods more expensive and raise consumer prices, just as the world recovers from pandemic-era inflation spikes.

“Now you’re going to find the halls of Washington really filled with the special interest groups and the lobbyists as people look for continued higher and higher tariffs to keep away foreign competition, and to protect inefficient American businesses that have failed to meet the needs of the American consumer,” Griffin said.
At the same event, Griffin also said he’s not focused on taking Citadel Securities public in the foreseeable future. Citadel is a market maker founded by Griffin in 2002.
“We’re focused on building the business, on investing in our future. And we do believe that there are benefits to being private during this period of very, very rapid growth,” he said. More

Democrats spent much of the presidential-election campaign calling Donald Trump a fascist. Mr Trump is hardly known for his conciliatory nature. So few American politicos expect there to be much bipartisanship in his second term. Yet in one place there is already a flicker of cross-aisle agreement: a proposal to cap interest rates on credit-card repayments at 10% has won the support of both Mr Trump and Bernie Sanders, perhaps the most prominent left-wing Democrat. More

Almost two years have passed since OpenAI released GPT-3.5 to great fanfare. Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, compared the technology’s arrival to his first encounter with the graphical user interface—a breakthrough that reshaped personal computing—in the 1980s. Others predicted that generative artificial intelligence (ai) would rapidly transform economies around the world, leaving many millions unemployed. Yet despite the hype and the worries, ai’s impact has been muted thus far. According to America’s Census Bureau, only 6% of businesses use AI to produce goods and services. Output and labour-productivity growth, meanwhile, remain far below the soaring heights of the computer age in the 1990s. More

Spare a thought for the analysts, bankers and fund managers who make a living from European shares. If your salary depends on talking up the stockmarkets of the continent that invented them, you have learned to live with disappointment. For much of the past two decades, you could have pointed out that European stocks were cheaper, relative to earnings, than American stocks. You could have reasonably argued that this portended better investment returns and less risk of crashes. And for all that time you would have been utterly, gloriously wrong. More