Investing

FA Playbook

This spring, affluent Americans felt relatively pessimistic about the economy, with several perceived threats to personal wealth, according to CNBC’s May 2023 millionaire survey.
Respondents said the top three threats to personal wealth were the stock market, inflation and U.S. government dysfunction.
Financial advisors cover the best ways to protect personal wealth from these risks.

Getty Images

Investors should ‘stick to their long-term plan’

With the debt ceiling crisis in the rearview mirror, investors are shifting their focus to other economic concerns, experts say.

“We’re starting to climb that wall of worry again,” said certified financial planner Chris Mellone, partner at VLP Financial Advisors in Vienna, Virginia, referring to market resilience despite economic uncertainty.
While some clients are hesitant to put money to work amid recession fears, he urges investors to “stick to their long-term plan,” rather than keeping cash on the sidelines, he said.
The volatility index, or the VIX, is currently trending lower, below 15 as of June 5, Mellone pointed out. “It looks like if we do have a recession, it’s going to be shallow,” he said.

Inflation is still a top concern

While inflation continues to moderate, many affluent Americans still worry about high prices.
“That’s the thing I hear the most from my clients,” said Natalie Pine, a CFP and managing partner at Briaud Financial Advisors in College Station, Texas, noting that inflation is a big concern for her clients with assets of $1 million to $5 million.
Annual inflation rose 4.9% in April, down slightly from 5% in March, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported in May.

We’re starting to climb that wall of worry again.

Chris Mellone
Partner at VLP Financial Advisors

A significant number of millionaires, especially older investors, believe it will take one to five years for inflation to fall to the Fed’s target of 2%, the CNBC survey found. Meanwhile, some 43% of millionaires are weighing portfolio changes or plan to make adjustments due to inflation.
Matthew McKay, a CFP who also works for Briaud Financial Advisors, said investing to “keep pace with and beat inflation” is the best way to combat sticky high prices.
“We’re seeing a lot more interest in alternative assets and private deals, which can generate returns,” he said. “We do a lot in the oil and gas space, which is a big driver of inflation, so that’s a good hedge there.” More

As the 2024 presidential race for the White House heats up, candidates’ plans for Social Security are emerging.
While top contenders have vowed to protect benefits, experts say reforms to the program are needed “sooner rather than later.”
That may require bipartisan compromises on benefits and taxes, or even possibly creating a more “modern” version of Social Security, as one hopeful is proposing.

zimmytws | iStock | Getty Images

Last November’s midterm elections were expected to bring a so-called “red wave” of wins for Republican candidates. But ultimately, voters gave Democrats an edge in some of the most competitive congressional districts.
One deciding factor was candidates’ messages around Social Security and Medicare, which helped sway voters, particularly those ages 50 and up, according to an analysis from AARP following the Nov. 8 election.

Now, as the 2024 presidential election approaches, and GOP hopefuls line up for their party’s nomination, they face new pressure to decide where they stand, particularly with Social Security.
Former President Donald Trump and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis — who thus far are in the lead in the Republican polls — have so far pledged not to touch the program.
“Under no circumstances should Republicans vote to cut a single penny from Medicare or Social Security to help pay for Joe Biden’s reckless spending spree,” Trump said in January.
In March, DeSantis told Fox News, “We’re not going to mess with Social Security as Republicans.”
Their position matches that of President Joe Biden, who during the State of the Union prompted both sides of the aisle to agree the program is “off the books.”

More from Personal Finance:This tool lets you play at fixing Social Security woesRetirement-savings gap may cost economy $1.3 trillion by 2040How a retirement age change could affect younger Americans
While that stance is popular with the public, some experts say it is ill-advised.
“It’s fundamentally irresponsible to say we’re not going to touch it when everybody who’s ever looked at the finances of the program recognizes that it’s going bankrupt,” said Whit Ayres, president of North Star Opinion Research, a center-right political polling operation.
The situation presents an opportunity for a hero to emerge, one who can put the program on sound financial footing, Ayres said.
One longshot Republican hopeful — former Cranston, Rhode Island, mayor Steve Laffey — plans to enter the race with his own bold plan to reconstruct Social Security as the first priority on his agenda.
“Our biggest problem is this: We as Americans simply don’t directly confront our problems,” Laffey said.
Social Security is the “ultimate example of that,” he said.

Changes needed ‘sooner rather than later’

A crucial inflection point, particularly for Social Security, is coming, according to the program’s trustees.
Social Security’s combined funds will only be able to pay full benefits until 2034. At that point, just 80% of benefits will be payable if nothing is done sooner.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle would need to agree on fixes for the program. These could include benefit cuts, such as raising the retirement age, tax increases or a combination of both.
But with Democrats vowing to protect benefits and Republicans swearing off tax increases, that has thus far left little room for compromise.

As Washington leaders recently worked out a deal to raise the nation’s debt ceiling for two years, the cost of Social Security and Medicare came under scrutiny.
Both Social Security and Medicare fall under the category of mandatory spending, which altogether represents more than two-thirds of the nation’s budget, according to the Tax Foundation.
Consequently, it is impossible to address the nation’s spending without addressing those programs, according to Tax Foundation economist Alex Durante.
“The longer we push this out, it becomes more difficult to try to protect everyone that receives the benefits,” Durante said. “It’s important that we tackle this sooner rather than later.”

Proposal for ‘modern version’ of Social Security

The Social Security plan Laffey would implement throws out the traditional approaches of tax increases or benefit cuts.
Instead, he wants to gradually phase out the FICA tax completely. Currently, workers and employers each pay 6.2% on up to $160,200 in wages toward Social Security.
That would be replaced by new Personal Security System accounts, to which workers would contribute 10% of their pay. Those balances would be invested in a weighted index of global stocks, bonds and other securities.
The plan comes from Laurence Kotlikoff, a Boston University economics professor who has devoted much of his career to helping people get the most from Social Security and demystifying the program’s many rules.
Kotlikoff himself ran for president in 2012 and 2016 as a third-party candidate. In subsequent election cycles, he has urged Laffey to run.
The two met when Laffey was working on “Fixing America,” a 2012 documentary about Americans’ perspectives on fixing the country’s problems post-financial crisis. Laffey wrote and co-produced the documentary, for which he interviewed Kotlikoff.
Laffey, a former Morgan Keegan executive, has mostly been out of politics after serving two terms as mayor of Cranston, Rhode Island.
He ran for a U.S. Senate seat in Rhode Island in 2006 and then in 2014 pursued the Republican nomination for a U.S. House seat representing Colorado, where he now lives. He was unsuccessful in both races.

Republican 2024 presidential hopeful Steve Laffey arrives for an interview at a local TV station in Cranston, Rhode Island, on March 17, 2023.
Ed Jones | Afp | Getty Images

Laffey launched a campaign for mayor at a time when Cranston had the lowest bond rating in America, he said. The big accomplishment he boasts as Cranston mayor is bringing the city’s bond rating up. The city’s S&P rating climbed to an A- in 2006 from a B in 2002, according to a spokesman for Laffey.
The Social Security plan would be a fully funded system, where you get your money back in the form of an inflation-indexed annuity, according to Kotlikoff.
“It’s a modern version of Social Security,” Kotlikoff said.
The goal would be to give beneficiaries a bigger return on the money than they get now.
It also aims to address the program’s current inequities. The government would make matching contributions on behalf of lower earners, the disabled and unemployed. Spouses would share their contributions to the program equally.
The investment strategies would be computerized and custodied by the federal government, not by Wall Street. Everyone would get the same rate of return, Kotlikoff noted.
The expectation is that over a 40-year time horizon the accounts would be able to make up for down years and ultimately provide workers with more money than today’s Social Security program.
The hope is a worker who is 20 years old in 2025 may eventually stand to get $10,000 per month, rather than $2,000, which would be a “lot better,” Laffey said.
The plan coincides with Laffey’s plans to overhaul government spending, such as changing the Federal Reserve’s inflation target to zero, rather than the current goal of 2%, in order to force Congress to work within its budget.

‘Both sides are going to have to give’

Because any changes to Social Security involve strict emotions, the big question is whether lawmakers and Americans would be ready to embrace a new direction for the program.
The idea of rethinking the way Social Security funds are invested has come up before.
While in office, President George W. Bush had proposed letting Americans save part of their Social Security taxes in personal retirement accounts, referred to as “partial privatization.”
Andrew Biggs, who worked in the White House on Social Security reform at the time and who is now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, remembers the proposal did not come close to succeeding, even as Social Security still had surpluses and Republicans controlled both houses of Congress.
Consequently, privatization — where personal accounts are funded out of part of the existing payroll tax — would be a long shot, he said.
“If Bush couldn’t do it then, despite a great effort, that’s not happening now,” Biggs said.
But personal accounts funded on top of the existing Social Security program, such as ensuring everyone signs up for a retirement plan at work, could be “more possible,” he said.
Another challenge may be getting Americans to embrace the idea.
The only people who like personalized accounts are affluent, college-educated white men, said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster and president at Lake Research Partners, who has conducted focus groups with married couples on the subject.
Women of all ages, who are very worried about the future of the program for their own economic security, are less likely to embrace the idea, she said.

Biden and Trump campaign signs are displayed as voters line up to cast their ballots during early voting at the Alafaya Branch Library in Orlando, Florida, Oct. 30, 2020.
Getty Images

For candidates, taking such a position can also jeopardize their primary and general election viability, Lake said.
Yet Ayres, of North Star Opinion Research, sees an opportunity for reforms much like President Ronald Reagan helped usher in, which put Social Security on sound financial footing for half a century, he said.
That likely won’t come from an “unworkable” overhaul of the program, Ayres said, but instead more marginal changes, such as raising the retirement age by several months and increasing the cap on Social Security earnings.
Like Reagan’s efforts, it would also require bipartisan commissions, he said.
As with the newly inked debt ceiling deal, “both sides are going to have to give a little bit,” Ayres said.
“Just putting your head in the sand and waiting for it to go bankrupt is a fundamentally irresponsible position,” he said. More

If you’re planning to donate money, certain charitable giving moves provide a bigger tax benefit, experts say.
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 increased the standard deduction, making it harder to claim charitable tax breaks.
But donor-advised funds and qualified charitable distributions from pre-tax individual retirement accounts may be worth exploring.

Donald Gruener | iStock | Getty Images

LAS VEGAS — Tax savings aren’t typically the main reason for philanthropy. But if you’re planning to donate money, certain charitable giving strategies provide a bigger tax benefit.
Since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, there’s been a higher standard deduction, which makes it harder to claim charitable tax breaks, explained Christopher Hoyt, a law professor at the University of Missouri in Kansas City.

Roughly 33% of taxpayers itemized deductions in 2017, compared to fewer than 10% in 2021, said Hoyt, speaking at the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ annual conference in Las Vegas on Tuesday.  
More from Personal Finance:Use this 401(k) investing strategy to calm your market jittersThese lesser-known tax tips may help college-bound familiesIvy League acceptances ‘may have bottomed out,’ expert says
For 2023, the standard deduction is $13,850 for single filers and $27,700 for married couples filing together, and there’s no benefit to itemized deductions — including charitable gifts, medical expenses and more — until the combined amount exceeds the standard deduction.
Given these constraints, investors can maximize tax breaks by “bunching gifts,” Hoyt said. “Concentrate your gifts in one year, as opposed to spreading them over several.”

Consider donor-advised funds for ‘bunching’

One popular option for bunching gifts is the so-called donor-advised fund, which provides an upfront tax break while acting like a charitable checking account for future gifts.

Donor-advised funds have exploded since the 2017 tax law change, and more than 75% are less than five years old, according to Hoyt. However, it’s unclear whether they will remain as popular once the increased standard deduction sunsets in 2026.

Typically, the best assets to donate to charity, including donor-advised funds, are profitable investments from a brokerage account because you can bypass capital gains taxes, which results in a bigger gift to charity. 
Nearly 60% of 2022 contributions to Fidelity’s donor-advised fund were non-cash assets, such as stocks, and many chose to donate assets with built-in gains, the organization reported.

Shift to individual retirement accounts at 70½

Once you’re age 70½ or older, it’s typically better to donate funds from pre-tax individual retirement accounts, known as qualified charitable distributions or QCDs, Hoyt said.
You can donate up to $100,000 per year from your pre-tax IRA, he said, and the “secret sauce” is that QCDs can satisfy your required minimum distributions.

“The big winners are donors who take the standard deduction,” Hoyt said, because QCDs don’t count as income, which can penalize seniors through higher Medicare Part B and Part D premiums.
To qualify, you must transfer the money directly from an IRA to an eligible charity and get a confirmation from the organization that you received no benefit in exchange, he said. More

After a more than three-year reprieve, federal student loan bills will restart within months.
With the Biden administration working to overhaul the student loan system, borrowers may see a number of changes when they begin repayment, or not long afterward.

Douglas Rissing | Istock | Getty Images

1. Lower payments from forgiveness (maybe)

Last August, Biden rolled out an unprecedented plan to cancel $10,000 in student debt for tens of millions of Americans, or as much as $20,000 if they received a Pell Grant in college, a type of aid available to low-income students.
However, the administration’s application portal had been open for less than a month when a slew of legal changes forced them to shut it. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear two of those lawsuits against the plan.

The justices are still debating the validity of the debt-relief policy and are expected to make a ruling by the end of the month.
If the highest court greenlights the president’s program, roughly a third of those with federal student loans, or 14 million people, would have their balances entirely forgiven, according to an estimate by higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz.
More from Personal Finance:Average food stamp recipient to get $90 less as Covid aid endsTime is running out to repay Covid-era 401(k), IRA withdrawalsEven as inflation rate subsides, prices may stay higher
These borrowers likely won’t have to make a student loan payment again, Kantrowitz said.
For those who still have a balance after the relief, the Education Department has said it plans to “re-amortize” borrowers’ lower debts. That’s a wonky term that means it will recalculate people’s monthly payment based on their lower tab and the number of months they have left on their repayment timeline.
Kantrowitz provided an example: Let’s say a person currently owes $30,000 in student loans at a 5% interest rate.
Before the pandemic, they would have paid around $320 a month on a 10-year repayment term. If forgiveness goes through and that person get $10,000 in relief, their total balance would be reduced by a third, and their monthly payment will drop by a third, to roughly $210 a month.
But if the high court strikes down the policy, most borrowers will likely have the same monthly payment they had before the pandemic, Kantrowitz said.

2. A new income-driven repayment option

The Biden administration is working to roll out a new, more affordable repayment plan for student loan borrowers.
That option revises one of the four existing income-driven repayment plans, which cap borrowers’ bills at a share of their discretionary income with the aim of making the debt more affordable to pay off.
Instead of paying 10% of their discretionary income a month, under the new program — the Revised Pay as You Earn Repayment Plan — borrowers would be required to pay 5% of their discretionary income toward their undergraduate student loans.

Kantrowitz provided an example of how monthly bills could change with the overhauled option.
Previously, a borrower who made $40,000 a year would have a monthly student loan payment of around $151. Under the revised plan, their payment would drop to $30.
Similarly, someone who earned $90,000 a year could see their monthly payments shrink to $238 from $568, Kantrowitz said.
The payment plan should become available by July 2024, he said, although, “it is possible that the changes could be implemented earlier, as the U.S. Department of Education has the flexibility to implement regulatory changes sooner in certain circumstances.”

3. A new servicer handling their loans

Several of the largest companies that service federal student loans announced during the Covid-19 pandemic that they’ll no longer be doing so, meaning many borrowers will have to adjust to a new servicer when payments resume.
Three companies that managed the loans — Navient, the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (also known as FedLoan) and Granite State — all said they’d be ending their relationship with the government.
As a result, about 16 million borrowers will have a different company to deal with by the time payments resume, or not long afterward, according to Kantrowitz.

“Whenever there is a change of loan servicer, there can be problems transferring borrower data,” Kantrowitz said. “Borrowers should be prepared for the possibility of glitches.”
Affected borrowers should get multiple notices about their change in lender, said Scott Buchanan, executive director of the Student Loan Servicing Alliance, a trade group for federal student loan servicers.
If you mistakenly send a payment to your old servicer, the money should be forwarded by the former servicer to your new one, Buchanan added. More

College is a major expense for many families, but a payment strategy can provide significant tax savings, according to a college funding expert.
You can save on taxes by analyzing your payment options, weighing state eligibility and more.

fstop123 | E+ | Getty Images

LAS VEGAS — College is a major expense for many families, but a payment strategy can provide significant tax savings, according to a college funding expert.
“Distribution planning is not just for retirement,” said certified financial planner Ross Riskin, chief learning officer for the Investments & Wealth Institute. Families also need a plan when tapping assets to pay for college, he said.

Education funding can be complicated, especially when you’re juggling eligibility for college tax credits, Riskin said at the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ annual conference in Las Vegas on Monday.
More from Personal Finance:Ivy League acceptance rates ‘bottomed out,’ expert saysStudent loan payments will restart soon. Many aren’t readyAs inflation rate subsides, prices may stay higher
The American opportunity tax credit offers a maximum of $2,500 per undergraduate student for up to four years, and the lifetime learning credit expands to graduate and professional degrees, worth up to $2,000 per eligible student per year.
However, you can’t “double dip” tax breaks by claiming one of these credits and withdrawing money from a 529 college savings plan for the same expense. So to claim the full value of the credit, you’ll need to plan ahead to cover a portion of tuition using income, loans or other eligible sources.

Compare payment options

“What you pay does not equal what it costs you,” said Riskin, who is also a certified public accountant. For example, let’s say you’re considering three ways to cover $30,000 in college expenses: your cash flow, a 529 plan or student loans.

If your effective tax rate is 35% and you pay for college with $30,000 of after-tax dollars, it actually costs you $46,000, he said. You may also tap a 529 plan, which may have grown from $18,000 of contributions, for example, and can provide tax-free withdrawals for eligible expenses.

What you pay does not equal what it costs you.

Ross Riskin
Chief learning officer for the Investments & Wealth Institute

While taking out student loans may seem counterintuitive, the strategy may offer tax-free loan forgiveness for certain future nonprofit and government employees. What’s more, student loans may provide other benefits like the ability to claim the American opportunity tax credit or establishing credit for the student, Riskin said.
“Advisors have done themselves a disservice of trying to simplify it,” he said, noting that many families default to 529 withdrawals without analyzing other options.

How to weigh 529 plan withdrawals

When it comes to 529 plans, there’s also the choice of whether to spend the money now or preserve it for family members, such as other children or even grandchildren, Riskin said. (Starting in 2024, families will also be able to roll unused 529 plan funds into a Roth IRA, with limitations.)
While the Secure Act expanded qualified education expenses for federal taxes, some states don’t recognize these costs for state tax purposes. For example, K-12 education is not a qualified education expense in New York.
If your withdrawal exceeds your qualified expenses or you take money after the year expenses were incurred, you may owe extra taxes and a penalty. There’s also a risk the state may recapture any state tax deduction previously received for contributions. “The recapture piece is important,” Riskin said. More

A bipartisan deal to raise the debt ceiling included changes to SNAP food assistance benefits.
Here’s who may be affected the most.

Tomml | E+ | Getty Images

Debt ceiling deal changes SNAP work requirements

SNAP already has work requirements for most adults ages 18 through 49 who do not have children.
Those beneficiaries may only qualify for benefits for three months in a three-year period unless they meet certain eligibility requirements. That includes being able to show they are either working or participating in job training for 20 hours per week. They may otherwise still qualify if they fall under an exemption category, such as if they are pregnant, disabled or have a physical or mental condition that prevents them from working.

You’re not going to balance the budget, much less pay down the debt, through these kinds of changes.

director of SNAP state strategies at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

The new legislation raises the ages those requirements apply to to include childless workers ages 50 to 54. The law would gradually phase in those workers by age, starting with those age 50 from 90 days after the law is enacted and eventually expanding to include 53- and 54-year-olds in 2024.

The requirements would be effective through Oct. 1, 2030.
The legislation also adds new categories of workers who are exempt from the work reporting requirements, including those who are homeless, veterans or those who were in the foster care system.

Cuts may create ‘a quiet struggle’

The changes will cut spending on SNAP, including how many people qualify for assistance.
In a Sunday interview with Fox News, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., touted the new work requirements as a win for welfare reform in the debt ceiling deal.
“We got it in welfare that puts people back to work, the core of what we looked for,” McCarthy said.
But some experts are concerned about the effects the moves may have on families in need.
Ed Bolen, director of SNAP state strategies at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said it is “upsetting” to see the changes included in the debt ceiling legislation.
“You’re not going to balance the budget, much less pay down the debt, through these kinds of changes,” Bolen said. “On the other hand, you’re going to affect up to 750,000 low-income older Americans who need food assistance.”

States, food banks and charitable organizations may step in to try to make up for the reduced access to SNAP benefits.
However, they will not be able to entirely fill the void, said Ellen Vollinger, SNAP director at the Food Research and Action Center. For every one meal food banks provide, SNAP provides nine times that assistance, she said.
“It’s not as if the problem goes away,” Vollinger said.
However, much of the shortfall may not be obvious. “A lot of that is going to be a quiet struggle that’s going to play out in kitchens around the country,” Vollinger added.

Drop in SNAP benefits may hurt in other ways

The new requirements also introduce other challenges, experts note.
SNAP is meant to help provide support to people who may be struggling to find work, Bolen noted. Expanded work requirements may make it tougher for older workers to find support at the same time they may encounter discrimination when trying to reenter the work force, he said.
Moreover, it may also be difficult for beneficiaries to prove they fall under the new exemption categories, particularly for those who are homeless, he said.

Ultimately, a decline in SNAP benefits may also hurt the economy, according to Vollinger.
For every dollar of SNAP during a downturn, estimates have found there is an economic generator of about $1.50 to $1.80, she said. Research also shows that SNAP benefits help support jobs in the farming sector, trucking industry and grocery stores, Vollinger said. More

Acceptance rates at the nation’s top schools are hovering near all-time lows.
But demographic shifts may cause application volume to ease in the years ahead.
“It’s never going to be harder to get in,” one college expert predicts.

Harvard Yard, on the campus of Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Maddie Meyer | Getty Images

This year’s high school graduating class faced one of the toughest college-application seasons on record.
At the nation’s top schools, including many in the Ivy League, “it’s never going to be harder to get in,” said Hafeez Lakhani, founder and president of Lakhani Coaching in New York.

The number of college applicants jumped 20% since the 2019-20 school year, pushing acceptance rates to all-time lows, a report by the Common Application found.
However, the recent application surge at the country’s top colleges and universities could be short-lived, Lakhani said. “Acceptance rates may have bottomed out.”
More from Personal Finance: SUNY sends acceptance letters to 125,000 high school seniors4 strategies to avoid taking on too much student debtThese moves can help you save big on college costs
At the most elite schools, this year’s numbers are striking. Harvard University, for instance, received more than 56,000 applications and admitted just 3.4% to the Class of 2027. Other universities, including Princeton, Yale and Columbia, also had acceptance rates below 5%.
But even as more students vie for the fewer available spots at those institutions, enrollment is falling nationwide.

There’s a growing cohort of people who start college but then withdraw, and fewer international students are choosing to study in the U.S. More would-be undergraduates are also deciding to forgo college altogether, citing the high cost among other factors.
Meanwhile, the overall population of college-age students is shrinking — a demographic trend commonly referred to as the “enrollment cliff.”
The number of high school graduates will turn down in 2026 and then “fall rapidly through the following decade,” said Doug Shapiro, executive director of the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.

How the enrollment cliff affects colleges

“I don’t think we’ll see significant changes in admit rates in the next couple of years,” said Connie Livingston, head of college counselors at Empowerly and a former admissions officer at Brown University.
However, in five to seven years, “those acceptance rates will climb slightly higher,” she predicted.

Those 3% to 4% acceptance rates could shift to 6% to 7%.

Connie Livingston
former admissions officer at Brown University More

A man carrying a box leaves a Deutsche Bank office in London, Britain July 8, 2019.
Simon Dawson | Reuters

Despite the disruption from the pandemic, the services sector has continued to grow over the past decade, offering opportunities to invest. 
TipRanks recognized the 10 best analysts in the services sector for identifying the best investment opportunities. These Wall Street analysts surpassed their peers with their stock picking and delivered considerable returns through their recommendations.

TipRanks leveraged its Experts Center tool to zoom in on analysts with a high success rate, and analyzed every recommendation made by analysts in the services sector over the past decade. 
The ranking shows analysts’ ability to generate returns from their recommendations. TipRanks’ algorithms calculated the statistical significance of each rating, the average return, and analysts’ overall success rate. Further, these ratings were measured over one year.

Top 10 analysts from the consumer goods sector

The image below shows the most successful Wall Street analysts from the services sector.

Arrows pointing outwards

1. Jason Seidl – TD Cowen

Jason Seidl tops the list. Seidl has an overall success rate of 73%. His best rating has been on Daseke (NASDAQ:DSKE), a provider of transportation and logistics solutions. His buy call on DSKE stock from May 7, 2020 to May 7, 2021, generated a solid return of 327.7%.

2. Patrick Brown – Raymond James

Patrick Brown is second on this list and has a success rate of 75%. Brown’s top recommendation is Saia (NASDAQ:SAIA), a transportation company. The analyst generated a profit of 211.2% through his buy recommendation on Saia stock from April 17, 2020 to April 17, 2021.

3. Scot Ciccarelli – Truist Financial

Truist Financial analyst Scot Ciccarelli ranks No. 3 on the list. Ciccarelli has a success rate of 73%. His best recommendation has been on Five Below (NASDAQ:FIVE), a value retailer. The analyst generated a return of 249.4% through a buy recommendation on FIVE from May 18, 2020 to May 18, 2021. 

4. Brian Nagel – Oppenheimer

Brian Nagel bags the fourth spot on the list. The analyst has a 67% overall success rate. Nagel’s best recommendation has been on Lovesac (NASDAQ:LOVE), a manufacturer and seller of high-quality furniture. His buy call on LOVE stock generated a stellar 800% return April 2, 2020 to April 2, 2021.

5. Carlo Santarelli – Deutsche Bank 

Fifth-place analyst Carlo Santarelli has a success rate of 63%. His best recommendation is Caesars Entertainment (NASDAQ:CZR), a leading casino-entertainment company. The analyst delivered a profit on this stock of 437.2% from April 24, 2020 to April 24, 2021.

 6. Gary Prestopino – Barrington

Taking the sixth position is Gary Prestopino. The analyst has a success rate of 55%. His top recommendation was for online-based automotive parts and accessories provider CarParts.com (NASDAQ:PRTS). Through his buy call on PRTS stock, Prestopino generated a solid return of 800% from Aug. 5, 2019, to Aug. 5, 2020.

7. Helane Becker – TD Cowen 

TD Cowen analyst Helane Becker is seventh on this list, with a success rate of 66%. Becker’s best call has been a buy on the shares of United Airlines Holdings (NASDAQ:UAL), an airline holding company. The recommendation generated a return of 180.7% from Dec. 8, 2009, to Oct. 22, 2010.

8. Walter Spracklin – RBC Capital

In the eighth position is Walter Spracklin of RBC Capital. Spracklin has an overall success rate of 64%. The analyst’s top recommendation is TFI International (TSE:TFI), a Canadian transportation and logistics company. Based on his buy call on TFI, Spracklin generated a profit of 215.2% from April 22, 2020, to April 22, 2021.

9. Jeff Van Sinderen – B.Riley

Jeff Van Sinderen ranks ninth on the list. The analyst sports a 52% success rate. His top recommendation has been on Celsius Holdings (NASDAQ:CELH), a consumer packaged goods company. The buy recommendation generated a return of 800% from April 22, 2020, to April 22, 2021.

10. Jake Bartlett – Truist Financial

Jake Bartlett has the 10th spot on the list, with a success rate of 66%. Bartlett’s best call has been a buy on shares of Jack in the Box (NASDAQ:JACK), a fast-food restaurant chain. The recommendation generated a return of 261.2% from April 1, 2020 to April 1, 2021.

Bottom line

Investors can follow the recommendations of top analysts to make an informed investment decision. We will return soon with the top 10 analysts of the past decade in the Industrials sector. More