Comments on Recent SEC Statement Related to Warrants Issued by Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (“SPACs”).

[…]

Read More…

On April 19, 2021, BVH filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) a Registration Statement on Form S-4 (the “Registration …

[…]

Read More…

What You Need to Know

The SEC extended its 45-day decision timeframe to 90 days on the VanEck Bitcoin Trust.
The move “only delays the inevitable,” lawyer Nick Morgan says.
Cryptocurrency funds are already available in other countries.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has pushed off its decision on whether to approve a Bitcoin ETF for VanEck until at least June 17.
In a filing, the agency extended its 45-day decision timeframe to 90 days for VanEck and Cboe’s application to list a Bitcoin exchange-traded fund.
“The SEC continues to be thoughtful in its evaluation” of a Bitcoin ETF, Ric Edelman, founder of the RIA Digital Assets Council,  told ThinkAdvisor on Tuesday in an email. “I am hopeful that the agency will conclude that approval of ETFs in this new asset class is better for investors because lack of such options is forcing investors to choose other paths which are often riskier and more expensive — not to mention greater risk of fraud.”
Fidelity Investments filed an application on March 25 with the SEC to launch a Bitcoin ETF called the Wise Origin Bitcoin Trust. It would track the performance of Bitcoin as measured by the Fidelity Bitcoin Index PR, which continually updates Bitcoin prices throughout the day based on feeds from multiple spot markets and a volume-weighted median price methodology.

[…]

Read More…

MCLEAN, Va., May 04, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Freddie Mac (OTCQB: FMCC) has priced a new offering of Structured Pass-Through Certificates (K Certificates), which includes a class of floating rate bonds indexed to the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR). The approximately $849 million in K Certificates (K-F110 Certificates) are expected to settle on or about May 13, 2021. The K-F110 Certificates are backed by floating-rate multifamily mortgages with 10-year terms, which are SOFR-based.
K-F110 Pricing

Class
Principal/Notional Amount (mm)
Weighted Average Life (Years)
Discount Margin
Coupon
Dollar Price

AS
$849.787
9.43
24
30-day SOFR avg + 24
100.000

XS
Non-Offered

Details

Co-Lead Managers and Joint Bookrunners: BofA Securities, Inc. and Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
Co-Managers: Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Multi-Bank Securities, Inc., Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC and Oppenheimer & Co. Inc.

Related Links

The K-F110 Certificates will not be rated and will include one senior principal and interest class and one interest-only class that is also entitled to static prepayment premiums. The K-F110 Certificates are backed by corresponding classes issued by the FREMF 2021-KF110 Mortgage Trust (KF110 Trust) and guaranteed by Freddie Mac. The KF110 Trust will also issue certificates consisting of the Class CS and R Certificates, which will be subordinate to the classes backing the K-F110 Certificates and will not be guaranteed by Freddie Mac.Freddie Mac Multifamily is a leading issuer of agency-guaranteed structured multifamily securities. K-Deals are part of the company’s business strategy to transfer a portion of the risk of losses away from taxpayers and to private investors who purchase the unguaranteed subordinate bonds. K Certificates typically feature a wide range of investor options with stable cash flows and structured credit enhancement.
This announcement is not an offer to sell any Freddie Mac securities. Offers for any given security are made only through applicable offering circulars and related supplements, which incorporate Freddie Mac’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on February 11, 2021; all other reports Freddie Mac filed with the SEC pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) since December 31, 2020, excluding any information “furnished” to the SEC on Form 8-K; and all documents that Freddie Mac files with the SEC pursuant to Sections 13(a), 13(c) or 14 of the Exchange Act, excluding any information “furnished” to the SEC on Form 8-K.
Freddie Mac’s press releases sometimes contain forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, some of which are beyond the company’s control. Management’s expectations for the company’s future necessarily involve a number of assumptions, judgments and estimates, and various factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the expectations expressed in these and other forward-looking statements. These assumptions, judgments, estimates and factors are discussed in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020, and its reports on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K, which are available on the Investor Relations page of the company’s Web site at www.FreddieMac.com/investors and the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements it makes to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this press release. The multifamily investors section of the company’s Web site at https://mf.freddiemac.com/investors/ will also be updated, from time to time, with any information on material developments or other events that may be important to investors, and we encourage investors to access this website on a regular basis for such updated information.
The financial and other information contained in the documents that may be accessed on this page speaks only as of the date of those documents. The information could be out of date and no longer accurate. Freddie Mac undertakes no obligation, and disclaims any duty, to update any of the information in those documents.
Freddie Mac makes home possible for millions of families and individuals by providing mortgage capital to lenders. Since our creation by Congress in 1970, we’ve made housing more accessible and affordable for homebuyers and renters in communities nationwide. We are building a better housing finance system for homebuyers, renters, lenders, and taxpayers. Learn more at FreddieMac.com, Twitter @FreddieMac and Freddie Mac’s blog FreddieMac.com/blog.

MEDIA CONTACT: Erin Mancini703-903-1530Erin_Mancini@FreddieMac.

[…]

Read More…

Dive Brief:

An analysis of the returns from equity strategies focused on environmental, social and governance (ESG) goals reveals no outperformance when adjusted for risk, according to a study by Scientific Beta.

“Claims of positive alpha in popular industry publications are not valid because the analysis underlying these claims is flawed,” Scientific Beta said, adding that ESG investing does “not offer significant downside risk protection either.”

“Our findings do not question that ESG strategies can offer substantial value to investors,” Scientific Beta says, adding “instead, they suggest that investors who look for value-added through outperformance are looking in the wrong place.”

Dive Insight:
The Scientific Beta study coincides with rising investor demand for ESG-related products and services and tougher scrutiny of ESG risks and corporate disclosures by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Biden administration.The SEC said last month in a “risk alert” that some investment advisers, investment companies and private funds may have misguided investors about their approach to ESG investing.The SEC found in an examination that some investment firms lacked sufficient policies and procedures for ESG investing, provided “weak or unclear” documentation for ESG-related decisions and pursued compliance efforts that did not appear to safeguard against flawed disclosures or marketing information.The SEC uncovered “some instances of potentially misleading statements regarding ESG investing processes and representations regarding the adherence to global ESG frameworks,” according to a review by the agency’s examinations division.The SEC in March mentioned climate-related risks first in its description of priorities for this year. “We are integrating climate and ESG considerations into the agency’s broader regulatory framework,” then-Acting Chair Allison Herren Lee said in a statement.The division noted in its risk alert last month that some investment companies did not follow through with commitments to clients on proxy voting.Some companies managed their investment portfolios in ways that contradicted their public disclosures about their approaches to ESG principles, the division said. For example, they invested in companies with low ESG scores or failed to meet public commitments to follow global ESG frameworks.Some companies also lacked controls that ensured they adequately took into account their clients’ investing preferences on ESG matters, the SEC said.Meanwhile, ING found in a survey released last month that 72 out of 100 institutional investors and family offices in the U.S., Europe and Asia-Pacific are seeking better ESG outcomes in their portfolios.
Forty-two percent of institutional investors said last year that they incorporate ESG factors into investment decisions compared with 22% in 2013, according to a Callan survey of 102 institutional investors released in October.Many of the world’s largest investment firms champion ESG investing. In his “2021 letter to CEOs,” BlackRock CEO Larry Fink said that companies with better ESG profiles outperformed their peers last year.“During 2020, 81% of a globally-representative selection of sustainable indexes outperformed their parent benchmarks,” Fink said. “This outperformance was even more pronounced during the first quarter downturn, another instance of sustainable funds’ resilience that we have seen in prior downturns,” he said. “And the broader array of sustainable investment options will continue to drive investor interest in these funds, as we have seen in 2020.”The perception of outperformance by ESG equity strategies has grown with investor interest in such investing, Scientific Beta said, adding “recent strong performance of ESG strategies can be linked to an increase in investor attention.“We find that alpha estimated during low attention periods is up to four times lower than alpha during high attention periods,” Scientific Beta said. “Therefore, studies that focus on the recent period tend to overestimate ESG returns.”ESG equity investing can offer advantages by enabling investors to align investments with their values, make a positive social impact or reduce climate or litigation risk, Scientific Beta says.  “Such benefits offset lower expected returns.”Still, “there is no solid evidence supporting recent claims that ESG strategies generate outperformance.

[…]

Read More…

House Democrats are starting to lay out a legislative wish list in response to two events that rocked financial markets this year: the implosion of Archegos Capital Management and wild trading in GameStop Corp.

Ahead of a Thursday hearing that will feature U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Gary Gensler, the House Financial Services Committee posted six draft bills on its website. The proposals ranged from banning payments for order flow to tightening oversight of family offices and requiring regulators to study gamification — a term describing video game like features that critics say have been exploited by Robinhood Markets and other online brokerages to keep customers trading.

Read More: Robinhood’s Role in the ‘Gamification’ of Investing

The bills likely highlight topics that lawmakers will ask Gensler about at the hearing, which is the panel’s third on the GameStop frenzy. The proposals were published without any legislative sponsors and some run just two pages, signaling it’s probably premature to view them as a sweeping plan for overhauling markets. Also appearing at the hearing are Financial Industry Regulatory Authority President Robert Cook and Depository Trust & Clearing Corp. President Michael Bodson.

If the ideas gain traction, they are certain to face opposition from the financial industry. Payment for order flow — the practice of market makers paying securities firms for the right to execute clients’ stock orders — is a revenue driver for most retail brokerages and they would be loathe to give it up.

The bill on family offices could force firms to register as investment advisers with the SEC if they manage more than $750 million. The sector is getting much closer scrutiny from Washington after Bill Hwang’s Archegos blew up in March, triggering billions of dollars of losses for banks.
Read More: A $6 Trillion Family Office World Fights Post-Archegos Crackdown
Other proposals would:

Mandate brokers disclose to clients the share of retail investors who lost money on options trading.
Restrict market makers from executing their own trades ahead of some customer orders.

Before it’s here, it’s on the Bloomberg Terminal.

[…]

Read More…

Section 311 of the California Corporations Code authorizes the creation of one or more committees.  Unlike Delaware, a committee of the board must have two or more members.  The board of directors may vest all of the authority of the board in a committee except with respect to seven specified actions.  One of these actions is authorization of a distribution to the corporation’s shareholders.
Because Section 166 defines “distribution to its shareholders” to include a corporation’s purchase or redemption of its own shares, a board may not delegate to a committee of the board its authority with respect to share repurchases.  The statute, however, includes an exception to the limitation.  Subdivision (f) of Section 311 permits such a delegation if the repurchase or redemption is “within a price range set forth in the articles or determined by the board”.   
Many publicly traded corporations that engage in stock repurchases rely upon Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b-18, which provides a voluntary “safe harbor” from liability for manipulation under Sections 9(a)(2) and 10(b) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 under the Exchange Act, when an issuer or its affiliated purchaser bids for or purchases shares of the issuer’s common stock in accordance with the rule’s manner, timing, price, and volume conditions.  Consequently, boards of Delaware corporations will typically authorize a share repurchase program that authorizes a total dollar amount that may be spent on repurchases but will delegate to  management the discretion to determine the timing and amount of specific repurchases based on a variety of factors, such as the market price of our common stock, corporate requirements, general market economic conditions and legal requirements, including Rule 10b-18. 
Section 311 does not address the authority of the board of a California corporation to make such a delegation to management as opposed to a committee of the board.  However, such a delegation would be consistent with Section 300 which requires that the business and affairs of the corporation be managed and exercised by or under the direction of the board.  Directors, however, should recognize that they face potential personal liability under Section 316(a)(1) for approving distributions contrary to Sections 500 and 501.  Because Section 166 specifies that the time of a distribution in the form of a repurchase or redemption is when the cash or property is transferred, it is possible that even though the requirements of Section 500 and 501 are met when a repurchase program is authorized, those requirements will not be met when shares are purchased pursuant to the program.

[…]

Read More…

May 5, 2021

[embedded content]

THE Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in line with its duty to promote good corporate governance and the protection of minority investors pursuant to its regulatory powers under Republic Act 11232, or the “Revised Corporation Code of the Philippines” (RCC), and Administrative Order 38, Series of 2013 (also known as Creating an Inter-Agency Task Force to Initiate, Implement and Monitor Ease of Doing Business Reforms), has issued SEC Memorandum Circular 7, Series of 2021 (MC7, S. of 2021) last April 23 to allow minority shareholders in publicly listed companies (PLC) to call special stockholders’ meetings.
MC7, S. of 2021 states that any number of shareholders holding at least 10 percent of the outstanding capital stock of a PLC shall have the right to call for a special stockholders’ meeting, subject to the guidelines provided under Section 49 of the RCC, and other relevant laws, rules and regulations (Item 1, MC7, S. of 2021).
The shareholders should have continuously held the shares for at least one year prior to the receipt by the corporate secretary of the written call for a special meeting (Item 2, MC7, S. of 2021).
The call for a special meeting should be in writing, addressed to the company’s board of directors and transmitted through the corporate secretary at least 45 days prior to the proposed date of the meeting (Item 3, MC7, S. of 2021).

The written request for the meeting must include the name of the stockholders and their respective percentage of shareholdings, which must constitute at least 10 percent of the outstanding capital stock of the corporation. The letter must be duly signed by all requesting shareholders [Item 3(i), MC7, S. of 2021].
The request should also provide the purpose, date and time, as well as proposed agenda items for the meeting.

The proposed agenda items should be matters that affect the legitimate interests of the shareholders on corporate actions where stockholders’ approval is required under the RCC, except the right to remove a director [Item 3 (ii)(iii)(iv), MC7, S. of 2021].
No stockholder may likewise call for a special meeting within 60 days from the previous meeting of the same nature where the same matter was discussed, unless allowed in the bylaws of the corporation or approved by the board [Item 3 (iii), MC7, S. of 2021].

Also, a special stockholders’ meeting cannot be called if the agenda will be covered in the next regular or special meeting scheduled not later than 30 days from the date of the request or if the agenda has already been discussed and resolved with finality in previous meetings [Item 3 (iv)(b)(c), MC7, S. of 2021].
If the board of directors determines that the call for the special meeting is compliant with MC7, s. of 2021, they shall issue a notice to convene the meeting at least seven days prior to the proposed date (Item 4, MC7, S. of 2021).
Should the call for a special meeting be inconsistent with the purpose of and conditions set under MC7, S. of 2021, the board must send a written notice to the requesting stockholders within 20 days from receipt of the request indicating the reasons and grounds for the denial of the request (Item 4, MC7, S. of 2021).
If the board fails to respond to the call for a special meeting within 20 days from the receipt of the request, the qualifying shareholders may avail of the remedy provided under paragraph 7, Section 49 of the RCC (Item 5, MC7, S. of 2021).

Any officer or agent of a corporation who refuses to allow a qualifying shareholder to exercise his/her right to call a meeting shall be made liable under Section 158 of the RCC, which allows the SEC to impose a fine ranging from P5,000 to P2 million, issue a permanent cease and desist order, suspend a corporation, revoke the corporation’s certificate of incorporation and dissolve the corporation (Item 6, MC7, S. of 2021).
As SEC Chairman Emilio B. Aquino noted on the SEC’s move in the issuance of MC7, S. of 2021: “The newly issued rules empower minority shareholders to better protect and advance their interests, as well as help listed firms have a wider perspective and be more inclusive in their decision-making process.”
“The greater protection afforded to minority shareholders should encourage increased participation in the stock market and, in turn, further deepen our capital market to support business expansions, jobs creation and overall economic growth.”
With the new rules in place, the commission anticipates the role of shareholders in exercising their rights and having a greater voice in the governance of corporations. We hope that this would ultimately redound to the benefit of all stakeholders.
The rules already took effect, following its publication in two newspapers of general circulation last April 24. The circular has also been posted on the SEC website. I encourage the public to check the full details of MC7, S. of 2021 through the commission’s official website at www.sec.gov.ph.

Kelvin Lester K. Lee is a commissioner of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The views and opinions stated herein are his own. You may email your comments and questions to [email protected].

[…]

Read More…

A customer walks towards the entrance of a CVS Health Corp. store in downtown Los Angeles, California, U.S., on Friday, Oct. 27, 2017.
Christopher Lee | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Check out the companies making headlines in midday trading.
U.S. Steel — Bucking declines in the broader market, shares of U.S. Steel rose 5.8% in midday trading after Credit Suisse upgraded the stock to outperform from underperform. Analyst Curt Woodworth told clients in a note that the surge in prices for steel made it clear that the industry was in a “super cycle.” He sees U.S. Steel stock rallying 42% from where it closed on Monday.

CVS Health — Shares of the pharmacy retailer gained 3.8% just after 11 a.m. in New York after CVS said it earned $2.04 per share in the first quarter, above the $1.72 expected. CVS sales, which also topped expectations, rose at its stores as customers flocked to the company’s locations to receive their Covid-19 vaccine. The company raised its full-year forecast.
Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Facebook, Alphabet — Shares of Big Tech stocks dropped on Tuesday with the Nasdaq Composite down over 2%. Shares of Netflix lost 1.6%, and Microsoft dropped 2.1%. Amazon and Facebook shed about 2.6%. Apple dropped 3.8% and Alphabet fell more than 3%.
SolarEdge – Shares of the solar inverter maker dropped more than 14% after the company warned that margins could be lower going forward, thanks to higher freight costs. SolarEdge did, however, top analyst expectations during the period. The company earned 98 cents per share excluding items, while revenue came in at $405.5 million. Analysts surveyed by FactSet were expecting earnings of 80 cents per share and $395.4 million in revenue.
Under Armour – Shares dipped just shy of 3.6% despite the company beating top and bottom line estimates during the first quarter. The retailer reported adjusted earnings per share of 16 cents on revenue of $1.26 billion. Analysts surveyed by Refinitiv were expecting the company to post a per-share profit of 3 cents on $1.13 billion in revenue. Separately, Under Armour said it reached a settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission over claims of disclosure failures.
Kroger, Alberstons — Shares of the grocery chains fell about 3.6% and 2%, respectively after Goldman Sachs said the return of restaurants and rising food prices should put pressure on supermarket stocks in the months ahead. Goldman downgraded Kroger to sell from neutral and Albertsons to neutral from buy, saying the companies were likely to be pinched by weakening demand and higher costs.

Quest Diagnostics — Shares of Quest Diagnostics gained 2% after UBS upgraded the stock to buy from neutral, saying industry fundamentals appeared to be at their healthiest point in more than a decade even as the revenue stream from Covid testing wanes.
Avis Budget — The car rental company’s shares dropped 4% despite a better-than-expected earnings report. Avis reported a loss of 46 cents per share, less than the expected loss of $2.16 per share, according to Refinitiv. Revenue also topped estimates. Avis management commented on the chip shortage and did not provide forward-looking guidance.
iRobot — Shares of iRobot fell 11% after reaffirming the range of its profit guidance, which is on the low end of analysts’ expectations. The company, however, reported EPS of 41 cents per share, well above the 9 cents per share expected on Wall Street, according to Refinitiv. Revenue also topped estimates.
Arconic — The industrial company’s share price surged more than 16% after beating on the top and bottom lines of its quarterly results. Arconic reported earnings of 46 cents per share on revenue of $1.68 billion. Analysts projected earnings of 27 cents per share on revenue of $1.54 billion.
— with reporting from CNBC’s Pippa Stevens and Tom Franck.

Become a smarter investor with CNBC Pro. Get stock picks, analyst calls, exclusive interviews and access to CNBC TV. Sign up to start a free trial today.

[…]

Read More…

May 4, 2021 11:24AM ET

Under Armour Inc. resolved one of its biggest headaches when it settled a Securities and Exchange Commission investigation, and now management can focus on a long-term strategy for profitable growth. In a Nutshell: In settling the SEC matter, the company agreed to pay a civil monetary penalty of $9.0 million, in addition to other non-monetary…

This content is for Annual and Limited members only. You can read up to five free articles each month with a Limited Level Subscription. Please log in, or subscribe.

[…]

Read More…

Rosie Rios, now former treasurer of the United States Department of the Treasury, speaks during the annual Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills, California, U.S., on Tuesday, May 3, 2016.
Patrick T. Fallon | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Blockchain start-up Ripple said Tuesday it had appointed former U.S. Treasurer Rosie Rios to its board, as the company battles a lawsuit from the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Ripple said Rios, the 43rd treasurer of the U.S. who served under President Barack Obama, would join its board of directors while it has also hired Kristina Campbell, previously an executive at fintech firms Green Dot and PayNearMe, as its chief financial officer.

“I’ve dedicated my career to financial inclusion and empowerment, which requires bringing new and innovative solutions to staid processes,” Rios said in a statement.
“Ripple is one of the best examples of how to use cryptocurrency in a substantive and legitimate role to facilitate payments globally.”
San Francisco-based Ripple uses blockchain technology to send money across borders for banks and other financial institutions, touting its platform as a more efficient alternative to the interbank messaging network SWIFT. But it also uses XRP, a digital asset it says can act as a “bridge currency” for converting one currency to another in a matter of seconds.
Ripple has benefited from the surging interest in digital currencies like bitcoin. It owns most of the XRP tokens in circulation and sells a tiny fraction of its holdings each month. XRP is now up more than 500% year to date.
At the same time, the company faces a major legal headwind in the United States. The Securities and Exchange Commission charged Ripple, co-founder Christian Larsen and CEO Brad Garlinghouse with conducting an illegal securities offering that allegedly raised more than $1.3 billion through sales of XRP.

Ripple denies the SEC allegations, contending that XRP is a currency rather than an investment contract.
“Rosie’s experience in the public and private sectors provides an invaluable perspective to Ripple, especially during this time as the industry works to define crypto’s future,” Garlinghouse said in a statement.
“We are extremely fortunate to have them on the team as we continue our rapid international growth and to champion for regulatory clarity in the U.S.”
Ripple says customer demand for its cross-border payments network remains strong. The company was last privately valued at $10 billion and is backed by the likes of Japanese financial services giant SBI Holdings, Spanish bank Santander and top venture capital firms including Andreessen Horowitz, Lightspeed and Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund.
Ripple ranked No. 28 on 2020’s CNBC Disruptor 50 list.

[…]

Read More…

TipRanksThese 3 Cathie Wood Stocks Are Set to Rip Higher By 40% (Or More)The markets lately are a mix of gains and volatility, and it’s tough, sometimes, for investors to make sense of it. In times like these, it makes sense to turn to the experts. Cathie Wood is one such expert, an investor whose stock choices have consistently outperformed the overall markets. A protégé of famed economist Arthur Laffer, market guru Wood has built her reputation on her clear view of the markets. Her firm is Ark Invest, whose Innovation ETF has over $52 billion in assets under management, making it one of the largest institutional investors on the scene. And better yet, Wood’s stock choices paid back during the ‘corona year;’ the ETF’s overall return in 2020 was an astounding 170%. With returns like that, it’s clear Cathie Wood knows what she’s talking about when she picks a stock. So, we’re taking a look at three of her stock choices, all from the ‘top 10’ of her firm’s holdings, by percentage weight within the portfolio. Using the TipRanks platform, we’ve found that, according to some Street analysts, each has at least 40% upside potential for the coming year. Let’s get the lowdown. Teladoc Health, Inc. (TDOC) The first stock on our list, Teladoc, was one of the ‘early adopter’ companies in the telehealth sector, making remote medical care available for non-emergency issues. Patients can use Teladoc to consult on ear-nose-throat matters, lab referrals, basic diagnoses and medical advice, and prescription refills for non-addictive substances. Teladoc bills its service as offering remote house calls by primary care doctors. Despite the obvious benefits of Teladoc’s service during the pandemic year, and steadily rising revenues, the company’s stock has underperformed the broader markets in the last 12 months. A look at the most recent quarterly report – for 1Q21 – will shed some light. The company reported $453.6 million at the top line, up an impressive 150% year-over-year. Earnings, however, told a different story. At $199.6 million, the net loss in Q1 was much deeper than the year-ago quarter’s $29.6 million loss. Per share, the loss came to $1.31, compared to just 40 cents one year earlier. The losses weighed on investors’ minds, but the company guidance was more worrisome. Management predicts that paid membership will be flat yoy in 2021. The stock fell 10% after the earnings release. Cathie Wood, however, started buying shares, taking advantage of the dip in price to increase her holdings of TDOC. Her firm bought up more than 716K shares, worth over $122 million at the time of purchase. Teladoc is Ark’s #2 holding, making up over 6% of the fund’s portfolio. While BTIG analyst David Larsen notes investors’ concerns, he believes the long-term outlook for the company remains positive. “The issue that may weigh on the stock, is 2021 membership guidance of 52 – 54M (+2% y/y) was left unchanged,” Larsen said. “Despite this headwind we still like the company and the stock. Management highlighted that the ‘pipeline for membership’ is now up more than 50% y/y, which is higher than what was reported in 4Q:20, and many of these deals are progressing. TDOC also won a large BCBS plan in the north-east due to the “whole person” model, and it’s a competitive take-away. We believe that management’s comments around membership pipeline are very calculated, and we would expect 2022 membership growth to be far better than 2021’s growth rate.” In line with his comments, Larsen rates TDOC as a Buy, and his $300 price target implies an upside of 83% for the year ahead. (To watch Larsen’s track record, click here.) Overall, Teladoc gets a Moderate Buy from the analyst consensus, a rating derived from 23 reviews that include 14 to Buy and 9 to Hold. The shares are priced at $163.21 and have an average price target of $243.68, making the one-year upside a robust 49%. (See Teladoc’s stock analysis at TipRanks.) Zoom Video Communications, Inc. (ZM) Next up, Zoom, needs no introduction. This tech-based video communications company had a low profile in 2019, but in the corona crisis of 2020 Zoom came of age. The company saw a tremendous expansion, in use and user base, and its stock peaked in November 2020 with a price well above $500 per share. It has since declined – but even after that decline, ZM shares still show a one-year gain of 121%. The share price decline in Zoom may be best seen as temporary volatility in a stock that is otherwise sound. Zoom went public in April of 2019, and has reported sequential revenue and earnings gains in every quarter since – with the gains accelerating last year. For Q4 of fiscal 2021, the last reported, Zoom reported $882.5 million at the top line, up 13.5% sequentially and a whopping 368% year-over-year. EPS in the last quarter was 87 cents; this compares to just 5 cents per share income the year before. Zoom reported $377.9 million in free cash flow for 4Q21, compared to $26.6 million one year earlier. In customer metrics, Zoom reported equally strong growth. It had more than 467K customers with more than 10 employees, growth of some 470% yoy, and 1,644 customers who paid more than $100,000 in the trailing 12 months, up 156% yoy. As for Cathie Wood, she thinks that Zoom will continue growing, saying, “I think it’s going to usurp a lot of the old telco infrastructure.” Two of Wood’s Ark funds own shares of Zoom, over 2.4 million shares in total, Zoom makes up roughly 3.40% of Ark’s portfolio. 5-star analyst Daniel Bartus, from Merrill Lynch, also likes ZM shares, and writes of the company’s model, “In our view, Zoom’s superior video experience has solidified its position as the go-to meetings platform post-COVID. As the pandemic lingers and enterprises adopt more flexible workforces, we believe 2021 will be another good year for Zoom. Post-pandemic, we believe Zoom remains well-positioned as the new communications standard and the upsell of Zoom Phone, Rooms, and additional features across the 467k customer base offsets the churn risk across smaller customers.” Bartus puts a Buy rating on the stock, with a $480 price target suggesting a potential upside of 52% for the coming year. (To watch Bartus’s track record, click here.) Wall Street’s views on Zoom offer a bit of a conundrum. The analyst consensus here is a Hold, based on reviews that include 6 to Buy, 10 to Hold, and 2 to Sell. On the other hand, the stock’s $444.40 average price target implies an upside of 41% on the one-year horizon. (See Zoom’s stock analysis at TipRanks.) Shopify, Inc. (SHOP) Last on our list of Wood’s picks, Shopify, is a Canada-based e-commerce giant that needs no introduction. Shopify has been around for 15 years, and was an early leader in providing e-commerce platforms to third parties. The company’s services include payment processing, marketing, shipping, and customer engagement. Shopify grossed $2.93 billion last year, and has seen sequential revenue gains in each of the last four quarters. While the stock has found 2021 more of a slog, it is still up by 77% over the past 12 months, handily beating the S&P 500’s 47% one-year gain. Starting out 2021, Shopify reported 110% year-over-year revenue growth for the first quarter, with the top line reaching $988.7 million. The company’s EPS in Q1, $9.94 per share, was inflated by unrealized gains from an equity investment, making comparison difficult, but the company also reported $7.87 billion in cash holdings as of the end of March, compared to $6.39 billion at the end of December. The solid gains in revenues and cash holdings are supported by a growing user base. Shopify’s mobile app, Shop, now has over 107 million registered users, of whom 24 million are monthly active users. And, the company has good word-of-mouth advertising; 45,800 of its ‘partners’ referred a fellow merchant to the service in the previous 12 months, a yoy gain of 73%. Looking at all of this, Cathie Wood thinks we may be seeing the start of the ‘next Amazon.’ She says, referring to the company’s position in the marketplace and its prospects for growth, “Shopify doesn’t care who wins. It’s going to be involved with many, if not most, of all of the sites that are going to be powering up commerce.” Her Ark funds are gobbling up shares of SHOP – they own over 690K, worth more than $754 million at current valuation. Colin Sebastian, 5-star analyst with Baird, agrees that Shopify is a stock to buy. He writes, “we view higher spending levels as supporting the enormous e-commerce market opportunity, sustaining a high level of innovation in platform services, and maintaining a high level of scalability. As such, we would be buyers of shares on any pullbacks related to margin commentary… We believe that Shopify will continue to be a key beneficiary of the migration toward multi-channel e-commerce as companies leverage and integrate a broad range of consumer touch-points to drive sales — including traditional offline, online, in-store, mobile, kiosks and call centers.” Sebastian’s price target here, $1,550, suggests an upside of 42% for the next 12 months. His rating is Outperform (i.e., a Buy). (To watch Sebastian’s track record, click here.) High-profile tech companies tend to attract a lot of attention, and Shopify has picked up no fewer than 30 analyst reviews in recent weeks. These break down to 16 Buys, 13 Holds, and just a single Sell, making the analyst consensus a Moderate Buy. The shares are priced at $1,092.01, and the average price target of $1,482.21 implies they have room to gain 36% this year. (See Shopify’s stock analysis at TipRanks.) To find good ideas for stocks trading at attractive valuations, visit TipRanks’ Best Stocks to Buy, a newly launched tool that unites all of TipRanks’ equity insights. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the featured analysts. The content is intended to be used for informational purposes only. It is very important to do your own analysis before making any investment.

[…]

Read More…

Nicholas Rigg/ Getty Images

Firms increasingly report a number called non-GAAP or pro-forma earnings along with earnings based on Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Non-GAAP is a customized version of earnings calculated after excluding earnings components that don’t require cash payments or are otherwise not important for understanding the future value of the firm. Firms first report GAAP earnings. Then they detail each item that was added or subtracted from GAAP earnings to arrive at non-GAAP earnings. The building blocks for a modern company are investments in research and development (R&D), branding, customer relationships, computerized data and software, and human capital. Yet these intangible investments are treated as expenses in calculation of profits, and not as assets. The more a company invests in improving its future profits by making knowledge investments, the higher its reported losses. The bottom-line number thus becomes an inaccurate indicator for future profitability. So, many firms present a non-GAAP number by adding back intangible expenses.

Tweet

Post

Share

Save

Print

Is a company making profit or a loss? It’s undoubtedly an important question in the minds of managers, investors, bankers, and boards of directors (investors would like to buy shares of, and banks would prefer to lend money to, a profitable company). But surprisingly, this question is becoming increasingly difficult to answer. The bottom-line number in income statements, which shows a profit or a loss, is calculated after so many deductions and adjustments that it provides no assurance of a firm’s core profitability. Compounding this development is the fact that, along with earnings based on Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), firms increasingly report a number called non-GAAP or pro-forma earnings.
GAAP is a fancy term for accounting rules and regulations. Non-GAAP, as the name suggests, is a profit number based on calculations that don’t follow accounting rules. Over 95% of S&P 500 companies report both GAAP and non-GAAP earnings, showing its wide prevalence. Here we’ll explain the benefits and downsides, as well as the reasons for increased reporting of non-GAAP numbers.
Non-GAAP earnings are a customized version of earnings calculated after excluding earnings components that don’t require cash payments or are otherwise not important for understanding the future value of the firm. Firms first report GAAP earnings. Then they detail each item that was added or subtracted from GAAP earnings to arrive at non-GAAP earnings.

Opportunities for Midsize Businesses in 2021
Set yourself up to thrive.

Non-GAAP reporting can totally change the picture of a company’s profitability. For example, for the fiscal year 2019, Pinterest reported a loss of $1.36 billion. It converted that loss into a non-GAAP profit of $17 million by adjusting certain costs. Losses turning into profits is becoming quite common for firms of all sizes. Hand-collected data from 2010 to 2019 shows that almost a fifth of firms that report GAAP losses turn their GAAP loss into a positive non-GAAP number.
What are the reasons for increased use of non-GAAP numbers? In our previous HBR articles, we claimed that financial statements are becoming less and less useful for assessing a firm’s performance. The building blocks for a modern company are investments in research and development (R&D), branding, customer relationships, computerized data and software, and human capital. The economic purpose of these intangible investments is no different from that of an industrial company’s factories and buildings. Yet these intangible investments are treated as expenses in calculation of profits, and not as assets. The more a company invests in improving its future profits by making knowledge investments, the higher its reported losses. The bottom-line number thus becomes an inaccurate indicator for future profitability. So, many firms present a non-GAAP number by adding back intangible expenses. For example, Vonage presented a “pre-marketing operating income” and Groupon presented an “adjusted consolidated segment operating income” by excluding marketing costs, arguing that they were investments, not expenses.
In addition, there are three important deductions that could distort the picture of core profitability: Stock option expenses, write-off acquired intangibles, and restructuring charges. Firms increasingly pay compensation to their employees via equity and stock options instead of regular salaries and performance-based cash bonuses. In fact, stock-based compensation now contributes 70% of the total compensation to a CEO. GAAP requires that the costs of stock-based compensation be deducted in the calculation of profits. However, stock-based compensation does not impose cash payments. On the contrary, when employees exercise their stock options, firms could save as much as 10% of their tax payments. Hence, many firms report non-GAAP earnings by adding back stock-option expenses, thereby reporting a number they claim better represents cash profits. For example, Roku turned its loss of $15 million into a positive number by excluding $26 million in stock-based compensation.
Acquisition of other companies has become a favored method of growth for modern corporations. A large part of the price paid for acquisition is for intangibles. For example, Facebook paid $17 billion for WhatsApp, entirely for its intangibles. Companies must test each year whether the acquired intangible is still worth the original value. If not, the reduction in the value must be deducted in the calculation of GAAP profits, even though it has no effect on the company’s cash balance. Such write-offs are not inconsequential. GE recorded a $22 billion write-off in just one year. Any profit or loss number calculated after deducting such an amount is unusable for predicting future profits because companies don’t record such write-offs every year. Hence, companies often add back that deduction to report a new non-GAAP number (see Amazon, for example).
Another important area is restructuring costs and loss on sale of assets. As we argued in a previous article, the pace of corporate creative destruction has increased. Technological progress is accelerating, and products and businesses are becoming obsolete faster. As a result, firms close unremunerative business segments more frequently, sell those assets at a loss, and pay severance to workers. Those costs are rightly deducted from GAAP profits. Yet restructuring events don’t occur every year. Profits calculated after deducting the one-time items are not useful for forecasting the future. Therefore, firms often report pro-forma earnings that exclude such restructuring costs, like Logitech and Lowes did.
Firms typically report higher non-GAAP earnings than GAAP earnings. Is such reporting of non-GAAP numbers informative to investors, or is it used by companies to mislead them? Research remains divided on this issue. Some studies show that investors and analysts find pro-forma earnings to be informative in determining a firm’s core profitability, particularly for loss firms. Boards of directors use pro-forma earnings to determine performance-based bonuses for CEOs, which, despite causing higher payment, could be beneficial to shareholders. For example, a CEO could postpone the closing of a loss-making business because doing so would reduce his GAAP-based bonus, causing further harm to shareholders.
But other studies claim that firms provide pro-forma earnings only to opportunistically report higher profits. Some exclusions from pro-forma earnings are not just one-time items but also affect future performance. Firms could also exclude negative items to meet investors’ expectations of profits. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) frowns upon the reporting of pro-forma earnings. SEC chairman Mary Jo White once said: “Your investor relations folks, your CFO, they love the non-GAAP measures because they tell a better story,” but “we have a lot of concern in that space.”
Limitations in financial reporting will only increase with time, and changes in accounting rules to mitigate those limitations will not occur soon. We support the view that whenever appropriate, managers must report pro-forma earnings while detailing and explaining the reason for each exclusion. Additional information shouldn’t hurt anyone. Using that information, investors can form their own opinion about a company’s profitability by adding or subtracting items they feel are most appropriate. If an investor doesn’t believe in pro-forma earnings, he or she can disregard the non-GAAP earnings and consider only the GAAP earnings.

[…]

Read More…

Great Falls, VA , May 04, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Thunder Bridge Acquisition II, Ltd. (Nasdaq: THBR) (“Thunder Bridge II” or the “Company”) is announcing that as a result of recent guidance issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding the accounting and reporting of warrants issued by Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (“SPACs”) (the “SEC Statement”), it has restated its previously issued financial statements included in the Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020 (the “Restatement”) to change the accounting treatment of its public and private placement warrants (collectively, the “Warrants”).
As the restated financials reflect, there is no cash impact to Thunder Bridge II’s business or historical financial statements in the affected period due to this restatement. The change in the accounting treatment of the warrants has no effect on Thunder Bridge II’s ongoing operations or its plans to complete the business combination that it announced on December 15, 2020 with indie Semiconductor, a leading pure-play provider of next-generation semiconductor and software solutions for the rapidly growing Autotech market, enabling ADAS/Autonomous, Connectivity, User Experience and Vehicle Electrification applications (the “Business Combination”).
Consistent with historical market practice for SPACs, the Company had been accounting for the Warrants as Shareholders’ Equity. With the recent SEC Statement, however, the Company has restated its financial statements such that the Warrants are accounted for as a Warrant liability and marked-to-market each reporting period. In general, under mark-to-market accounting, as the stock price increases, the fair value of the Warrant liability recorded on the Company’s balance sheet increases, and the Company recognizes additional noncash expense in the Statement of Operations for the Change in fair value of warrant liability, with the opposite effect when the stock price declines.
The change in the accounting treatment for the Warrants caused the Company to record a Warrant liability on the restated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2020 and recognize a noncash expense for the Change in fair value of Warrant liability in the restated Statement of Operations for the Year Ended December 31, 2020. There was no change to the Company’s previously Net Change in Cash in the Statement of Cash Flows for the Year Ended December 31, 2020.
The Company filed a Form 8-K for the Restatement with the SEC on April 30, 2021, and filed a Form 10-K/A for the Restatement on May 4, 2021, and filed an amended Form S-4 for the Business Combination on May 4, 2021. The Company and indie Semiconductor remain committed to working to close the Business Combination as soon as practicable.
About Thunder Bridge Acquisition II, Ltd.
Thunder Bridge Acquisition II, Ltd. is a blank check company formed for the purpose of effecting a merger, share exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses. In August 2019, Thunder Bridge Acquisition II consummated a $345 million initial public offering (the “IPO”) of 34.5 million units (reflecting the underwriters’ exercise of their over-allotment option in full), each unit consisting of one of the Company’s Class A ordinary shares and one-half warrant, each whole warrant enabling the holder thereof to purchase one Class A ordinary share at a price of $11.50 per share. Thunder Bridge II’s securities are quoted on the Nasdaq stock exchange under the ticker symbols THBRU, THBR and THBRW.
About indie
indie is empowering the Autotech revolution with next generation automotive semiconductors and software platforms. We focus on edge sensors for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems including LiDAR, connected car, user experience and electrification applications. These technologies represent the core underpinnings of both electric and autonomous vehicles, while the advanced user interfaces transform the in-cabin experience to mirror and seamlessly connect to the mobile platforms we rely on every day. We are an approved vendor to Tier 1 partners and our solutions can be found in marquee automotive OEMs around the world.
Headquartered in Aliso Viejo, CA, indie has design centers and sales offices in Austin, TX; Boston, MA; Detroit, MI; San Francisco and San Jose, CA; Budapest, Hungary; Dresden, Germany; Edinburgh, Scotland and various locations throughout China.
Additional Information about the Transaction and Where to Find It
In connection with the proposed transaction, Thunder Bridge II filed a registration statement on Form S-4 (the “Form S-4”), which includes a proxy statement/prospectus, with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on January 25, 2021, which was amended on March 23, 2021 and May 4, 2021, and intends to file any and all additional relevant materials and other documents, as they become available, regarding the proposed transaction with the SEC. Thunder Bridge II’s shareholders and other interested persons are advised to read, the preliminary proxy statement/prospectus, included in the Form S-4, and the amendments thereto and the definitive proxy statement/prospectus and documents incorporated by reference therein filed in connection with the proposed business combination, as these materials will contain important information about indie, Thunder Bridge II and the proposed business combination. Promptly after the Form S-4 is declared effective by the SEC, Thunder Bridge II will mail the definitive proxy statement/prospectus and a proxy card to each shareholder entitled to vote at the meeting relating to the approval of the Business Combination and other proposals set forth in the proxy statement/prospectus. Before making any voting or investment decision, investors and shareholders of Thunder Bridge II are urged to carefully read the entire Form S-4 and proxy statement/prospectus, when they become available, and any other relevant documents filed with the SEC, as well as any amendments or supplements to these documents, because they will contain important information about the proposed transaction. The documents filed by Thunder Bridge II with the SEC may be obtained free of charge at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov or by directing a request to Thunder Bridge Acquisition II, Ltd., 9912 Georgetown Pike, Suite D203, Great Falls, Virginia, 22066, Attention: Secretary, or by calling (202) 431-0507.
Participants in the Solicitation
Thunder Bridge II and its directors and executive officers may be deemed participants in the solicitation of proxies from its shareholders with respect to the business combination. A list of the names of those directors and executive officers and a description of their interests in Thunder Bridge II is in the proxy statement/prospectus for the proposed business combination included in the Form S-4, which is available at www.sec.gov. Information about Thunder Bridge II’s directors and executive officers and their ownership of Thunder Bridge II ordinary shares is set forth in Thunder Bridge II prospectus, dated August 9, 2019 and in the proxy statement/prospectus included in the Form S-4, as may be modified or supplemented by any Form 3 or Form 4 filed with the SEC since the date of such filings. Other information regarding the interests of the participants in the proxy solicitation is also disclosed in the proxy statement/prospectus included in the Form S-4 pertaining to the proposed business combination. These documents can be obtained free of charge from www.sec.gov.indie and its directors and executive officers may also be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the shareholders of Thunder Bridge II in connection with the proposed business combination. A list of the names of such directors and executive officers and information regarding their interests in the proposed business combination is disclosed in the proxy statement/prospectus included in the Form S-4 for the proposed business combination.
Forward-Looking Statements
This communication contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such statements include, but are not limited to, statements about future financial and operating results, our plans, objectives, expectations and intentions with respect to future operations, products and services; and other statements identified by words such as “will likely result,” “are expected to,” “will continue,” “is anticipated,” “estimated,” “believe,” “intend,” “plan,” “projection,” “outlook” or words of similar meaning. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding indie’s industry and market sizes, future opportunities for indie and Thunder Bridge II, indie’s estimated future results and the proposed business combination between Thunder Bridge II and indie, including the implied enterprise value, the expected transaction and ownership structure and the likelihood, timing and ability of the parties to successfully consummate the proposed transaction. Such forward-looking statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of our management and are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are difficult to predict and generally beyond our control. Actual results and the timing of events may differ materially from the results anticipated in these forward-looking statements.
In addition to factors previously disclosed in Thunder Bridge II’s reports filed with the SEC and those identified elsewhere in this communication, the following factors, among others, could cause actual results and the timing of events to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations expressed in the forward-looking statements: inability to meet the closing conditions to the business combination, including the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstances that could give rise to the termination of the definitive agreement; the inability to complete the transactions contemplated by the definitive agreement due to the failure to obtain approval of Thunder Bridge II’s shareholders, the failure to achieve the minimum amount of cash available following any redemptions by Thunder Bridge II shareholders, redemptions exceeding a maximum threshold or the failure to meet The Nasdaq Stock Market’s initial listing standards in connection with the consummation of the contemplated transactions; costs related to the transactions contemplated by the definitive agreement; a delay or failure to realize the expected benefits from the proposed transaction; risks related to disruption of management’s time from ongoing business operations due to the proposed transaction; changes in the automobile or semiconductor markets in which indie competes, including with respect to its competitive landscape, technology evolution or regulatory changes; changes in domestic and global general economic conditions, risk that indie may not be able to execute its growth strategies, including identifying and executing acquisitions; risks related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and response; risk that indie may not be able to develop and maintain effective internal controls; and other risks and uncertainties indicated in Thunder Bridge II’s final prospectus, dated August 9, 2019, for its initial public offering, and the proxy statement/prospectus relating to the proposed business combination, including those under “Risk Factors” therein, and in Thunder Bridge II’s other filings with the SEC. Indie cautions that the foregoing list of factors is not exclusive.
Actual results, performance or achievements may differ materially, and potentially adversely, from any projections and forward-looking statements and the assumptions on which those forward-looking statements are based.

[…]

Read More…

Certified Advisor Reviews™ are designed to comply with the new SEC rule and provide the transparency consumers deserve.
Tweet this

However, reviews published on conventional platforms like Google and Yelp do not meet SEC requirements for promotion and lack important information necessary for consumers to judge their accuracy and merits.
Certified Advisor Reviews™ from Wealthtender are designed to comply with the new SEC rule and provide the transparency consumers deserve when their life savings could be at stake. For example, consumers will know if:

Compensation in any form was provided for a review
Conflicts of interest may have influenced a review
A review was written by a client or other acquaintance of the advisor

To earn the Certified Advisor Review™ mark, a review must display this information clearly and prominently, along with supplemental disclosures provided by financial advisors to meet federal and/or state regulatory requirements. Financial advisors on Wealthtender who remain in good standing are authorized to display the Certified Advisor Reviews™ badge on their website, email signature and social media accounts. 
“Financial advisors embracing online reviews will lead the industry in attracting new clients throughout the historic transfer of wealth from Baby Boomers to Millennials over the next decade,” said Brian Thorp, Founder and CEO of Wealthtender. “And financial advisors who collect and display Certified Advisor Reviews™ demonstrate their commitment to putting consumers’ interests first, whether or not they become a client.”
Wealthtender also streamlines the process of converting reviews from sites like Google or Yelp into Certified Advisor Reviews™ with clients’ permission. Since financial advisors cannot promote Google or Yelp reviews, converting reviews into Certified Advisor Reviews™ unlocks their full potential to attract future clients.
“While popular review sites can help businesses rank higher in search results, financial advisors face heightened scrutiny from regulators and risk unintended consequences not commonly known,” said Thorp. “For example, Yelp penalizes businesses that proactively ask for reviews and Google’s algorithms sometimes remove legitimate reviews which can’t be reinstated.”
Wealthtender developed Certified Advisor Reviews™ under the guidance of Leila Shaver, founder of My RIA Lawyer and Shaver Law Group, LLC. With experience as General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and serving hundreds of financial advisors, Shaver’s ongoing counsel ensures Wealthtender can help advisors confidently and compliantly grow their business with Wealthtender’s modern marketing platform.
Certified Advisor Reviews™ are the newest feature available to financial advisors who join Wealthtender’s digital marketing platform to attract their ideal clients. Advisors can turn the reviews feature on or off at any time. Additional benefits for advisors joining Wealthtender include:

Increased recognition for their areas of specialization and professional credentials
Improved search engine optimization (SEO) to get seen by more prospective clients
Referral opportunities from hundreds of financial professionals and educators on Wealthtender
Visibility from thousands of consumers visiting wealthtender.com each month

“Wealthtender offers a high value, lower cost complement to the marketing solutions advisors value most and replaces legacy platforms no longer delivering results,” said Thorp. “We’re excited to partner with forward-thinking wealth management firms and established leaders in the advisor marketing space to best meet the needs of advisors ready to grow their business.”
To learn more about Certified Advisor Reviews™ and Wealthtender’s digital marketing platform for financial advisors, please visit https://wealthtender.com/certified-advisor-reviews.
About Wealthtender
Wealthtender believes everyone deserves help with money matters from someone they can trust, no matter their income or stage of life. Wealthtender publishes articles, guides, directories and reviews to educate consumers on a wide range of personal finance topics and the value of hiring a financial advisor or coach best suited for their individual needs. By bringing together thousands of consumers who visit wealthtender.com each month with leading financial professionals and educators, Wealthtender is helping people enjoy life more with less money stress.
Media Contact:Brian Thorp
Founder and CEO
Wealthtender
(512) 856-5406
[email protected]
1 Final Rule: Investment Adviser Marketing (Source: https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2020/ia-5653.pdf)
SOURCE Wealthtender, Inc.

[…]

Read More…