 |
|
|
|||||
If youve chosen a target asset allocationthe mix of stocks, bonds, and cash in your portfolio youre probably ahead of many investors. But unless youre investing in a set-and-forget investment option like a target-date fund, your portfolios asset mix will shift as the market fluctuates. In a bull market you might get more equity exposure than you planned, or the reverse if the market declines. Rebalancing involves selling assets that have appreciated the most and using the proceeds to shore up assets that have lagged. This brings your portfolios asset mix back into balance and enforces the discipline of selling high/buying low. Rebalancing doesnt necessarily improve your portfolios returns, especially if it means selling asset classes that continue to perform well. But it can be an essential way to keep your portfolios risk profile from climbing too high. Where and how to rebalance If its been a while since your last rebalance, your portfolio might be heavy on stocks and light on bonds. A portfolio that started at 60% stocks and 40% bonds 10 years ago could now hold more than 80% stocks. Another area to check is the mix of international versus U.S. stocks. International stocks have led in 2025, but that followed a long run of outperformance for U.S. stocks, so your portfolio might lack international exposure. (Keeping about a third of your equity exposure outside the U.S. is reasonable if you want to align with Morningstars global market portfolio.) Other imbalances might exist. Growth stocks have gained nearly twice as much as value stocks over the past three years. You might also be overweight in specialized assets such as gold and bitcoin thanks to their recent run-ups. After assessing your allocations, decide where to make adjustments. You dont need to rebalance every accountwhat matters is the overall portfolios asset mix, which determines your risk and return profile. Its usually most tax-efficient to adjust within a tax-deferred account such as an IRA or 401(k), where trades wont trigger realized capital gains. For example, if youre overweight on U.S. stocks and light on international stocks, you could sell U.S. stocks and buy an international-stock fund in your 401(k). If you need to make changes in a taxable account, you can attempt to offset any realized capital gains by selling holdings with unrealized losses. That might be difficult, as the strong market environment has lifted nearly every type of asset over the past 12 months. Only a few Morningstar Categories (including India equity, real estate, consumer defensive, and health care) posted losses over the trailing 12-month period ended Oct. 30, 2025. The average long-term government-bond fund lost about 8% per year for the trailing five-year period as of the same date, so those could offer opportunities for harvesting losses. Required minimum distributions can also be used in tandem with rebalancing. Account owners have flexibility in which assets to sell to meet RMDs. If you own several different traditional IRAs, you could take the full RMD amount from any of them. Selling off holdings that appreciated the most can bring the portfolios asset mix back in line with your original targets. Another option is funneling new contributions into underweight asset classes. Depending on the size of additional investments, this approach might take time, but its better than not rebalancing at all. This might also appeal if youve built up capital gains you dont want to realize. Final thoughts Rebalancing is especially important in extremely volatile times. But even in a more gradual bull market like in recent years, its important for keeping a portfolios risk level in check, especially for investors as they approach retirement and start spending their portfolios. ___ This article was provided to The Associated Press by Morningstar. For more personal finance content, go to https://www.morningstar.com/personal-finance Amy C. Arnott, CFA is a portfolio strategist for Morningstar.
Category:
E-Commerce
The Trump administration left nursing off a list of “professional” degrees in a move that could directly limit how future nurses will finance their education. Removing the profession from the list will have a major impact, after the passing of President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which introduced a cap on borrowing. As of July 1, 2026, students who are not enrolled in professional degree programs will be subject to a borrowing cap of $20,500 per year and a lifetime cap of $100,000. However, professional degrees offer higher loan options, with the ability to borrow $50,000 per year and a $200,000 lifetime cap. ‘A backhanded slap’ Nursing is the largest healthcare profession in the United States, with about 4.5 million registered nurses. And given that most nurses (76%) rely on financial aid to pay for their education, the move has drawn immense backlash, as it’s being widely viewed as a slight against the profession. That’s especially true because nurses, who have a lengthy list of responsibilities, including providing frontline patient care, running lab work, assisting in procedures, and more, are often seen as one of the most essential pieces of the healthcare system. Bassey Etim-Edet, a high-risk labor and delivery nurse in Baltimore who was on the front lines of care during the COVID pandemic, told Fast Company that the Trump administration’s move sets the wrong precedent and that the impact can’t be overstated. “To go from ‘healthcare hero’ to not being recognized as a professional is such a backhanded slap,” Etim-Edet says,” especially at a time when legal precedent has made it clear that nurses are as responsible for provider mistakes as the providers themselves.” “We are disrespected, underpaid, and under-resourced,” she added. “Still, we serve.” Etim-Edet, who graduated with $150,000 in student loans, says her career wouldn’t have been possible without the HRSA Nurse Loan Repayment Program. “In exchange for working 23 years at a critical access hospital, the government paid back a massive percentage of my loans,” Etim-Edet explained. “At the end of my service commitment, my loan balance was down to about $60,000. I was able to buy a home, start a family, and live” because of the program. Fever pitch In response to the move, the American Nurses Association (ANA) launched a petition aimed at fighting the lower classification. It warned, “This move stems from an effort to rein in student loan debt and tuition costs as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act; however, it means that postbaccalaureate nursing students would only be eligible for half the amount of federal loans as graduate medical students.” The petition continued, “We call on the Department of Education to revise the proposed definition of ‘professional degrees’ to explicitly include nursing.” Amid the backlash, the Department of Education called concerns around the move “fear-mongering” by “certain progressive voices” in a lengthy statement released on Monday, November 24. “The definition of a ‘professional degree’ is an internal definition used by the Department to distinguish among programs that qualify for higher loan limits, not a value judgement about the importance of programs,” the statement reads. “It has no bearing on whether a program is professional in nature or not.” It also noted that “95% of nursing students borrow below the annual loan limit and therefore are not affected by the new caps.” A spokesperson for the Department of Education referred Fast Company to the statement when reached for additional comment. Still, nurses seem to disagree. At a time when healthcare in our country faces a historic nurse shortage and rising demands, limiting nurses access to funding for graduate education threatens the very foundation of patient care,” Jennifer Mensik Kennedy, president of the American Nurses Association, said in a statement. “In many communities across the country, particularly in rural and underserved areas, advanced practice registered nurses ensure access to essential, high-quality care that would otherwise be unavailable.” The Trump administration’s move comes as the nationwide nursing shortage is expected to continue to worsen. Etim-Edet adds that, as the system is already collapsing, younger people who greatly value work-life balance won’t want to work in a career that isn’t financially accessible or good for their emotional health.
Category:
E-Commerce
The line between human and machine authorship is blurring, particularly as its become increasingly difficult to tell whether something was written by a person or AI. Now, in what may seem like a tipping point, the digital marketing firm Graphite recently published a study showing that more than 50% of articles on the web are being generated by artificial intelligence. As a scholar who explores how AI is built, how people are using it in their everyday lives, and how its affecting culture, Ive thought a lot about what this technology can do and where it falls short. If youre more likely to read something written by AI than by a human on the internet, is it only a matter of time before human writing becomes obsolete? Or is this simply another technological development that humans will adapt to? It isnt all or nothing Thinking about these questions reminded me of Umberto Ecos essay Apocalyptic and Integrated, which was originally written in the early 1960s. Parts of it were later included in an anthology titled Apocalypse Postponed, which I first read as a college student in Italy. In it, Eco draws a contrast between two attitudes toward mass media. There are the apocalyptics who fear cultural degradation and moral collapse. Then there are the integrated who champion new media technologies as a democratizing force for culture. Back then, Eco was writing about the proliferation of TV and radio. Today, youll often see similar reactions to AI. Yet Eco argued that both positions were too extreme. It isnt helpful, he wrote, to see new media as either a dire threat or a miracle. Instead, he urged readers to look at how people and communities use these new tools, what risks and opportunities they create, and how they shapeand sometimes reinforcepower structures. While I was teaching a course on deepfakes during the 2024 election, Ecos lesson also came back to me. Those were days when some scholars and media outlets were regularly warning of an imminent deepfake apocalypse. Would deepfakes be used to mimic major political figures and push targeted disinformation? What if, on the eve of an election, generative AI was used to mimic the voice of a candidate on a robocall telling voters to stay home? Those fears werent groundless: Research shows that people arent especially good at identifying deepfakes. At the same time, they consistently overestimate their ability to do so. In the end, though, the apocalypse was postponed. Post-election analyses found that deepfakes did seem to intensify some ongoing political trends, such as the erosion of trust and polarization, but theres no evidence that they affected the final outcome of the election. Listicles, news updates, and how-to guides Of course, the fears that AI raises for supporters of democracy are not the same as those it creates for writers and artists. For them, the core concerns are about authorship: How can one person compete with a system trained on millions of voices that can produce text at hyper-speed? And if this becomes the norm, what will it do to creative work, both as an occupation and as a source of meaning? Its important to clarify whats meant by online content, the phrase used in the Graphite study, which analyzed over 65,000 randomly selected articles of at least 100 words on the web. These can include anything from peer-reviewed research to promotional copy for miracle supplements. A closer reading of the Graphite study shows that the AI-generated articles consist largely of general-interest writing: news updates, how-to guides, lifestyle posts, reviews, and product explainers. The primary economic purpose of this content is to persuade or inform, not to express originality or creativity. Put differently, AI appears to be most useful when the writing in question is low-stakes and formulaic: the weekend-in-Rome listicle, the standard cover letter, the text produced to market a business. A whole industry of writersmostly freelance, including many translatorshas relied on precisely this kind of work, producing blog posts, how-to material, search engine optimization text, and social media copy. The rapid adoption of large language models has already displaced many of the gigs that once sustained them. Collaborating with AI The dramatic loss of this work points toward another issue raised by the Graphite study: the question of authenticity, not only in identifying who or what produced a text, but also in understanding the value that humans attach to creative activity. How can you distinguish a human-written article from a machine-generated one? And does that ability even matter? Over time, that distinction is likely to grow less significant, particularly as more writing emerges from interactions between humans and AI. A writer might draft a few lines, let an AI expand them, and then reshape that output into the final text. This article is no exception. As a non-native English speaker, I often rely on AI to refine my language before sending drafts to an editor. At times, the system attempts to reshape what I mean. But once its stylistic tendencies become familiar, it becomes possible to avoid them and maintain a personal tone. Also, artificial intelligence is not entirely artificial, since it is trained on human-made material. Its worth noting that even before AI, human writing has never been entirely human, either. Every technology,from parchment and stylus paper to the typewriter and now AI, has shaped how people write and how readers make sense of it. Another important point: AI models are increasingly trained on datasets that include not only human writing but also AI-generated and humanAI coproduced text. This has raised concerns about their ability to continue improving over time. Some commentators have already described a sense of disillusionment following the release of newer large models, with companies struggling to deliver on their promises. Human voices may matter even more But what happens when people become overly reliant on AI in their writing? Some studies show that writers may feel more creative when they use artificial intelligence for brainstorming, yet the range of ideas often becomes narrower. This uniformity affects style as well: These systems tend to pull users toward similar patterns of wording, which reduces the differences that usually mark an individual voice. Researchers also note a shift toward Westernand especially English-speakingnorms in the writing of people from other cultures, raising concerns about a new form of AI colonialism. In this context, texts that display originality, voice, and stylistic intention are likely to become even more meaningful within the media landscape, and they may play a crucial role in training the next generations of models. If you set aside the more apocalyptic scenarios and assume that AI will continue to advanceperhaps at a slower pace than in the recent pastits quite possible that thoughtful, original, human-generated writing will become even more valuable. Put another way: The work of writers, journalists, and intellectuals will not become superfluous simply because much of the web is no longer written by humans. Francesco Agnellini is a lecturer in digital and data studies at Binghamton University, State University of New York. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||