The rise of fee-based annuities is accelerating as insurance firms respond to evolving regulations, especially in light of the Department of Labor’s fiduciary rule. These products, which charge transparent annual fees instead of embedded commissions, are designed to better align with client interests and reduce potential conflicts. 

However, while fee-based annuities may suit some investors, others—particularly long-term holders—might benefit more from commission-based options due to lower lifetime costs. 

Commissionable annuities, despite carrying higher built-in expenses, can eliminate ongoing advisory fees and may be better suited for clients who need less active management. Choosing between the two depends on several factors, including the annuity's fee structure, potential need for liquidity, and whether features like living benefits are added. 

Finsum: Ultimately, advisors and clients must carefully weigh these trade-offs to determine the best fit based on individual goals, timelines, and financial preferences.

Once seen as a slow-moving defensive play, the utilities sector has surged in 2024, outperforming all other S&P 500 sectors thanks to its unexpected ties to artificial intelligence. With companies like Constellation Energy and Vistra powering AI data centers through nuclear energy, utilities are benefiting from tech-fueled demand growth typically reserved for Silicon Valley. 

This shift has pushed the sector up nearly 26% year-to-date and attracted strong inflows, even outperforming on both market-cap and equal-weighted bases. Traditionally valued for their consistent demand, pricing power, and dividends, utility stocks are now getting a second look from growth-focused investors. 

Actively managed funds like the Virtus Reaves Utilities ETF (UTES) have capitalized on this shift, delivering over 40% returns by overweighting AI-aligned holdings. Meanwhile, traditional utility ETFs such as XLU, VPU, and IDU remain popular options.

Finsum: AI could continue to reshape what investors expect from the utility sector.

Francois Rochon once observed that true investing success comes not from avoiding market volatility but from using it to one’s advantage—a mindset that resonates deeply today. 

Markets, by nature, swing between extremes, and the recent months have been no exception, testing the patience of even seasoned investors. Rather than reacting emotionally to these shifts, investors are increasingly turning to structured approaches that bring consistency to decision-making. 

One such approach is factor-based investing, which allocates capital based on specific attributes like profitability, low volatility, or long-term momentum. This strategy reduces reliance on market timing and instead builds portfolios grounded in time-tested characteristics. 

Finsum: In uncertain environments, such disciplined frameworks can offer clarity and help investors stay focused on enduring outcomes rather than short-term noise.

Plan sponsors continue to grapple with low engagement and limited financial literacy when it comes to retirement income within defined contribution plans, according to a new DCIIA study. Many employers are hesitant to implement retirement income solutions due to competing priorities, legal risks, and a lack of internal resources or formal decumulation strategies. 

Complexity, lack of standardization, and concerns over liquidity and portability further complicate adoption. However, plan sponsors anticipate growing interest in lifetime income options through 2025 and 2026, especially as peer adoption increases. 

Safe harbor provisions from SECURE 2.0 are expected to encourage adoption by reducing perceived legal liability, and DCIIA will expand its research later this year to better understand these barriers and opportunities.

Finsum: Solutions that offer personalization, flexibility, and simplicity are most appealing, though widespread uptake may hinge on stronger education and clearer evaluation tools.

Although it's common to think small-cap stocks suffer most during recessions, the data tells a more nuanced story. Analysis of developed markets shows that in 64% of years when GDP declined, small caps actually outperformed large caps—a rate even higher than their typical performance advantage. 

This finding challenges the belief that economic slowdowns always disadvantage smaller firms. One reason may be that financial markets are inherently forward-looking, often pricing in future recovery well before it's visible in economic data. 

As a result, the size premium—where small caps outperform—can still emerge during downturns. Ultimately, small-cap strength isn't strictly tied to GDP trends, underscoring the importance of long-term diversification over short-term predictions.

Finsum: This is much different than the interest rate driven volatility several years ago, this could be a great time to capitalize