Whether you realize it or not, you are a long-term investor. The 35-year-old certainly has a longer life expectancy, but even a 70-year-old is likely to need their assets for decades to come. As a long-term investor what you should care about is what happens over a long period of time.

For reference, here is a price chart of the S&P 500 going back 70 years. The trend is up.

In fact, if you had invested $1,000 and reinvested all dividends over the last 70 years, your investment would have become more than $1,600,000. Yes, our math is correct, $1.6M. So, investing for the long-term is the prudent thing to do when you are building assets for a lifetime (which we already agreed is most of your assets).

So why begin the article with a cautionary quote?

Here is why. People are out of their minds right now and we are concerned that you may be getting caught up in it too. Anecdotes abound to support this point – traditionally conservative individuals are now interested in highly speculative investments (e.g. bitcoin), the number of second home purchases is climbing rapidly, and we’re hearing of more and more day trading going on (thank you Robinhood). Each of these in isolation would not be a concern but the confluence of all of them is setting off alarm bells. More importantly, the data is starting to confirm the anecdotes.

To tell this story well, we need to go back to Finance 101 and rediscover why anyone would own a stock. When you buy a stock, you are buying the rights to future profits. You are an owner. In many cases, those profits are returned to you as a shareholder via a dividend. There are some companies (usually high growth ones) that do not distribute a dividend at all. In this case, you are hoping that the company distributes a dividend in the future or that the price of the stock goes up so you can sell it at a profit to someone else.

If we were to set aside stocks and just think about purchasing behavior broadly. The decision about whether to buy is undoubtedly driven by two factors – the price you pay and the value you derive.

Let’s pull on this thread a bit more.

Imagine your favorite food. Imagine how good it smells, looks, and tastes. Now imagine that the price has gone up exponentially because everyone else has decided it is also their favorite food. At some point, it would become so expensive that you would stop purchasing no matter how much you loved it.

A stock should not be any different.

The only reason the price of a stock should go up exponentially is because the future profits are expected to match that trajectory. While profits are recovering and expanding, stock prices appear to be expanding at a faster rate driving up a common measure of value in the market place – the price to earnings ratios (P/E). See insert below for detail on P/E ratios or feel free to skip below:

Nerd alert:

Let us dive into one of the most often cited financial metrics of market value – price to earnings (or P/E). This ratio takes the (P) price you pay per share and divides it by the (E) earnings per share (Remember earnings equals profit). If the ratio goes up, then the price is climbing faster than earnings and you are paying more for the same value that you derive (profits which translate to cash to you as an owner).

This metric is not perfect, none are, but for illustrative purposes we like it. So, what has happened to P/E ratios in the last few years? Well, they have gone up. A lot.

Let’s dive deeper using a twist on the traditional P/E ratio. The cyclically adjusted price to earnings (CAPE) ratio was developed by Nobel Prize winning Yale economist Dr. Robert Shiller as a way to better normalize the noise that you get when using a standard P/E ratio. A large cadre of people believe the CAPE ratio is more nuanced and accurate at forecasting future stock returns than the basic P/E ratio. What is important to understand is that the CAPE ratio and standard P/E ratio are both measures of relative value in the stock market.

For reference, the CAPE ratio of the S&P 500 now sits above 37 (see chart below). The only other time in history it was this high was during the peak of the dot-com bubble when it nearly hit 45.

Our conclusion is this; beware of market eurphoria. Now before you hit the “sell” button on your equities, remember what we stated above. Long-term investors play the long-term trends, and this is what we recommend you do too.

This is a time of caution, a time to stay the course. Not a time to ratchet up risk even if everyone else is doing so with reckless abandon. Thank you, Warren, for the reminder.

Note: If you want to check out Dr. Shiller’s work you can find it HERE, including the data that sits behind the CAPE ratio chart above.

The post It’s time to be cautious appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

According to Investopedia, Irrational exuberance refers to investor enthusiasm that drives asset prices higher than those assets’ fundamentals justify. 

We have recently been fielding questions from clients as to whether or not the market as a whole or a specific security is overvalued (e.g. bitcoin, Tesla).  Spoiler alert – We do not know.

Even still, we thought it would be interesting to put together a multi-part series on the topic of valuation and exuberance.

Part 1: GameStop, Tesla, and Amazon – What is the difference between mania and speculation?

Let us start with recent news.

This week, GameStop’s stock surged by more than 450%.  In a week.  This is the same company that in September announced it was closing more stores than expected and did not even earn a profit in 2018 or 2019.

Was there an earnings announcement? No.  Did they find a pot of gold under one of their stores? Not that I am aware of.  Was there any news whatsoever?  No, and yes…

The company did not announce any news but apparently a ton of Reddit and Discord users dog-piled into the stock pumping it ever higher and creating a virtuous cycle of musical chairs.  The whole episode has nearly toppled hedge funds, raised alarm bells at the SEC and Congress, and enriched a select group of lucky people.

So, is that mania?

You are probably rolling your eyes and saying “yes, that one is easy to identify.”  If it is so easy to identify mania then why are investors still piling in?  Is it the fear of missing out (FOMO), is it the belief that some other “sucker” will pay more later or do some of these investors really believe that GameStop is undervalued?

This got us thinking.  Irrational exuberance drives manias but how is a mania different than intelligent speculation and can you identify it in the moment?

We believe a specific stock or even sections of the market can look over or under valued at any given point in time.  That does not mean they are.  Valuation of an asset is based on all available information today, but more importantly, the likely anticipated outcomes in the future.

That means that the answer to the over/under value question is not yes or no but rather, what is the likelihood that profits will follow to justify that valuation.

As an example, I have felt that Tesla’s stock is overvalued for a long-time.  Not because it is a good deal at $X price but because the future will have to be near perfect to justify its surging valuation.  Just because I feel that way does not mean it is overvalued.  In fact, I felt the same about Amazon years ago and it has proven me and many others wrong.  Here is some proof of how wrong I was…

In 2013, Amazon stock was up nearly 59% for the year, dwarfing the NASDAQ and nearly every other major index.  Their profits had been negative earlier that year (and would go negative again in 2014).  There were many well respected critics who felt the rise was totally unjustified.

Look at the language used below, the word mania isn’t used but it’s pretty much implied:

11/4/2013 – Amazon’s stock reminds me of the game of musical chairs. As long as the tune of irrational exuberance continues to play, then shareholders dancing around Amazon’s highly valued shares can continue to enjoy the siren song of extreme optimism.  – Advisor Perspective Magazine

11/23/2013 – “How everyone is so willing to wait. That they’re going to be a Walmart one day, they’re going to finally have a profit margin of some significance, and they’re finally going to make some money… I kind of watch it every day, mystified by its superman characteristics.” – Jeffrey Gundlach

Well?  We all know how that story has played out.  Amazon stock now trades at 10X its value on 12/31/2013.  Its trailing twelve-month profits are $17 – capital B – billion and the comment about being the Wal-Mart one day?  They eat Wal-Mart’s lunch.

So, was Amazon overvalued then?  Was it a mania?

With the benefit of hindsight, I would say no to both.  There certainly could have been elements of mania, but investors during that time could probably put into the camp of speculators.  A lot needed to go right for them to profit and the future was definitely not certain.  Even with the benefit of hindsight, you can still understand why some felt it was a mania at the time.  The point is that it is incredibly difficult to discern between a mania and speculation especially in the moment.

To be clear, I am not advocating that you purchase or don’t purchase GameStop stock (or any other one for that matter).  That is not the point.  The point is that if you are an investor you should care about likelihood of outcomes. For our part, we prefer diversification and a much more boring approach to investing because the odds are in our favor for the long haul.

If you are one of the lucky few who have made money in these rollercoaster stocks – good for you.  Just remember, going forward, the question is, “who will be left standing when the music stops?”

See you next time to talk about the drivers of mania.  We’ll also unpack the question that is on a lot of people’s minds – “is the market overvalued?”

P.S. – As I was penning this article, the WSJ had a great piece outlining the GameStop mania. You can find it HERE

Source: https://www.advisorperspectives.com/commentaries/2013/11/04/how-i-explain-amazon-s-stock-performance.pdf

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/schifrin/2013/11/29/gundlach-irrational-exhuberance-and-amazon-com/?sh=70403f486a5b

The post YOLO, FOMO, and am I crazy or is everyone else? appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

No, we’re not going to chide them for wearing T-shirts to work or complain that they’re always on their devices.  Today’s post is about a growing trend among millennials – We are addicted to Free.

If you’ll hang with me for a few minutes I’d like to break down the genesis of this trend, how it has impacted your everyday habits (including financial services), and why each of us should always be conscious consumers.

So let’s start with the why…

Like each generation before us, we have been shaped by the events and trends during our formative years.  In the case of Millenials, I would argue that The Great Recession and the rise of technology were the triggers for our focus on financial self-reliance.

As the financial crisis erupted here in America, we watched our parents lose their jobs and their financial security right as they were nearing retirement.  Our response has been to change jobs more frequently, try to create side hustles for extra income, and strive for financial independence as fast as possible all the while “hacking” our way to low cost and free options.

The proliferation of the internet, software, and technology advancement has been like gasoline on this frugality fire as we have grown accustomed to consuming services that are “free” to the consumer – Gmail, Youtube, Instagram, etc.

As large corporations have continued to roll out these, “free,” services we have happily consumed without much regard to how these Fortune 500 companies manage to pay their bills.

After all, we don’t pay anything to watch Youtube, or have those Amazon socks delivered in two hours, or check our Gmail accounts…right?

Well.  Not really…

All of these technological advancements have certainly changed the way that we operate in our daily bubbles, but it hasn’t made all of this convenience free.  It has simply shifted how we pay for things.  In the past, the consumer used a service and paid the bill directly.  Now we all pay for these services, but do so in a far less direct way.

For example, social media companies make money by sending you targeted ads.  Influencers make money by influencing you to buy things.  Advertisers pay for your time and attention on these platforms and in turn sell you products and services.

Now I hear you saying, “I don’t use those links!” But let’s be honest for a minute, if you didn’t, these companies would cease to exist, and individuals would stop clogging my Instagram feed with videos that invariably start with the phrase, “hey guys!”

So let’s just all agree that nothing is in fact “free.”  If you’re willing to make that leap, let’s talk about why this matters to you as investor…

Financial service companies have gotten into the “free” game

If you’ve opened an internet browser or turned on a television in the last 12 months, I guarantee you have seen ads for trading, taxes, etc. that look like this Fidelity goes to zero commission index funds. Did you count how many times the word “zero” was used?  I lost count.

If you aren’t already, you should now be asking yourself, “so, how do they make money selling ‘free’?”

In the case of trading platforms like Scwhab, TD Ameritrade, and Fidelity, the short answer is that we don’t know yet, but whatever method they utilize will likely be far less straight forward to you the end client.  Let’s explore a few examples:

1. By making money on your idle cash: This one is quite easy to explain. When you have cash in an investment account, your custodian invests that money, earns interest and either pays you less than what they make or nothing at all.  This is not a new strategy (this is what banks do), but I would argue it is far less straightforward than paying for trades directly.
2. Through order routing: When you click the button to make a trade, there is a lot that goes on behind the scenes. Rather than take several pages to explain it, just know that your custodian may be compensated for routing your order to certain firms that take the other side of the trade.  If they do this, it is disclosed to you but I’m guessing you won’t actually notice it since very few people read disclosures (myself included).  So if someone else is paying these custodians to take your trades, where do they make it back up?  From you. The mechanics of how it is done is even more complex and murky but if you want to dig deeper because you are a nerd like me, than check out this Investopedia article Here.  The point is that when you’re making trades it is still going to cost you somewhere along the line.
3. By creating new innovations – Robinhood has been one of the most well-known and recent examples of disrupters in the financial services space. They use #1 and #2 above as well as a whole bunch of other interesting “new” ways to make money.  One of their proposed inventions was to offer checking and savings accounts that paid high interest rates but wouldn’t qualify for FDIC insurance (you know, the guarantee that insures your accounts up to $250,000 if the bank defaults?).  Yea, that is a pretty big deal.  It actually got them in some hot water last year with regulators leading them to scuttle the plan.  If you’re interested in reading some of the other ways Robinhood makes money, check out this interesting article.

I’m not saying that there is anything inherently wrong with any of these strategies.  But I do think it is important to understand how companies make money because a company that doesn’t bring in revenue ceases to exist pretty quickly.

Suffice it to say, purchasing channels have rapidly changed in the last decade for consumers like you and me.  What hasn’t is the corporate mandate to maximize profits.

So my ask is simple – stop running towards the “FREE” sign and become a discerning buyer.  You will be better off and so will the reputation for Millenials.

The post FREE. FREE. FREE! appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

The answer is almost certainly yes.  In fact, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 60% of private employers offer some type of workplace life insurance program.

I’m going to make the case today on why young and healthy workers should generally opt out of these programs that have out of pocket costs and instead get their own policies.

Let’s start with the basics.

What is a workplace plan and how does it work?

If you have a workplace life insurance program chances are it is a multiple of your salary (1x, 2x, etc.).  A typical benefit is 2x your salary paid by the company with the option to purchase additional out of pocket coverage.  Policies are typically term products (i.e. the premium is paid, and the coverage is in force.  Stop paying, it lapses).

The process to get the policy is super easy.  You sign up during benefit enrollment season and provided it isn’t above a certain threshold (e.g. $500,000), you don’t even have to provide personal information.

So, workplace plans are easy and sometimes free – what’s the downside?

Three negatives: coverage, cost and portability.

Coverage – Most employer plans top out at 5-6x salary.  A good rule of thumb for coverage is 10-15x yearly income.  Your employer plan won’t get you all the way to where you need to be.

Cost – The cost of employer plans is not based on your individual health risk but rather on a pool of employees in your age bracket.  Which means that you are considered an “average” risk.  If you’re healthier than average, you are overpaying to support less healthy members in your pool.

Lack of portability – When you leave your employer you likely can’t take your plan with you.  Which means that you will lose your coverage, be forced to buy an individual policy, or opt into another employer plan.  This isn’t a sustainable model as some employers don’t have plans and what if you decide to start your own company?

The takeaway:  If you have free coverage through work – take it.  If you’re paying for additional coverage and you’re healthy, let’s talk.

The post Why workplace life insurance is just OK. appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

I’ve seen so much underinsurance over the last two years I thought it was worth some of your time (and mine) to identify why and then discuss why it matters for your financial wellbeing.

One thing is clear – we aren’t underinsured due to a lack of information or resources.  After all, property and casualty insurance businesses spent $6.5 billion in 2015 to advertise.  You likely have friends who sell insurance for a living and talk to you about it.  Heck, you’re even reading this article.  You know this is something that is important but you’re probably going to finish reading this and take no action.

Why aren’t you buying?

Two reasons – inertia and a lack of trust with insurance agents.

Bottom line, people don’t spend their day thinking about being killed or robbed.  I can’t blame anyone.  It’s depressing and unproductive to imagine all the ways your day can be ruined.  So, we bury this topic in the back of our brains, cross our fingers, say a prayer and hope nothing happens.

Once in a blue moon, we have a near miss (e.g. health scare) which triggers us into action and throws insurance to the front of our brain.  Even then, a lack of trust remains a barrier.

Insurance Agents are one of the least trusted professions.  According to a recent Gallup poll, less than 11% of Americans rate their trust of insurance agents as Very High or High.  Thank God for politicians (9%), otherwise insurance agents might occupy the bottom spot.

In conclusion, insurance is a topic that people don’t think about and when they are forced to do so (through ads or solicitation) run away as fast as possible.  Not exactly a shocker that I come across family and friends that are one disaster away from financial distress.

So that’s probably why you’re not buying.

Why is it important?

Let’s take a few minutes to educate on what insurance is, how to determine the “right amount”, and why you should stop reading this article right now and fix this gap in your personal finances.

First, let’s dip our toe into the insurance world and talk about the types of insurance.  Put simply, if there is a potential “loss” then there is likely an insurance company that will insure against the loss. Here are some common ones:

Loss: Death Insurance type: Life insurance

Loss: Auto accident Insurance type: Auto insurance

Loss: Improper or illegal medical care Insurance type: Malpractice insurance

The type of insurance you need is dependent on the types of potential loss you are carrying in your daily life.    The amount you need is much less straightforward as the answer comes with the dreaded words, “it depends.”

My interpretation, and what I tell my clients, is that you should insure against any type and amount of loss that is legally required or would threaten your financial wellbeing.  For those living paycheck to paycheck that could mean insuring their laptop they bought at Best Buy.  For the wealthy, that usually means insuring against higher dollar amount losses such as loss of life, disability, or harm to a small business.

Since many of the cases that we see at Cirrus are life insurance related, let’s take a look at a very straightforward example:

Case Example (illustrative purposes only):

Background: 35-year-old, attorney, earning $100,000, $300,000 in assets, with two kids and a partner (also 35 years old) that stays home with the kids.

How much life insurance is needed?

Assumptions:

• The $100,000 of income translates into $80,000 of take-home pay, of which $20,000 is saved, the remaining $60,000 is spent.
• We need $60,000 to cover expenses right now and in perpetuity
• We need to fully cover the cost of college tuition for both kids starting in 12 years

Asset pool needed to generate $60,000 in perpetuity safely – $2,000,000 (~3% withdrawal)

Cost of in-state tuition, room and board in 12 years for two kids – $300,000

Answer:  Assuming time value of money plus a little contingency our attorney needs approximately $2-3M of life insurance.  This is overly simplistic and we are ignoring a lot of the particulars for this individual.  That said, this gets you in the ballpark.

That amount might surprise you, it certainly surprised me the first time.  Particularly if you are one of the individuals that buys life insurance through work at a multiple of their salary like I used to do.  For people in that position they are likely carrying $300,000-500,000 of coverage.  Imagine the financial stress of trying to keep a family afloat on 25% of what they need to make it long term?

One of my colleagues shared a quote that has stuck with me.  You only buy life insurance if you have one of two situations – you owe people money or you have people you care about.  I’m guessing if you’ve read this far, you are one of those people.  So, take a moment, reflect and determine if you’ve adequately protected those you care about.

The post You’re probably under insured and will stay that way even after reading this article appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

When I started in this business one of the most interesting observations was how different the route to wealth was for each of our clients.  Yes, there are the types of clients that you might expect; those who inherit large sums, business owners that sold their businesses, high earners (executives and physicians) and even lottery winners.  The most interesting of all, however, are the ones who built significant wealth off strong, but not exceptional incomes.  Their superpower – saving.

Since I’m a self-proclaimed nerd, I thought I might lay out some nerdy math to show you how two well earning individuals can accumulate multigenerational wealth by doing something really simple – saving 15% of their yearly income.

To be clear multi-generational wealth has no specific definition.  For the purpose of this exercise, let’s assume the threshold is $5 million in today’s dollars on the last day of your life.  Also, let’s quickly layout some other important assumptions:

Example Details:

• Yearly income: $90k each ($180k total)
• Tax rate: 27%
• Savings rate: 15% (+5% match)
• Living expenses: $95k (what’s left)
• Investment return: 7%
• Inflation: 3% (for income / expenses)

For many of my younger clients, this is a pretty typical scenario.  Some are single earners with stay at home partners, some earn far more (and spend it), and others earn less (and save more).  Nonetheless, this is a good reasonable starting point for discussion.

So, if you and your partner began this type of saving pattern at 25, continued it through age 65, quit working full time, and live to 100 where would you be?

The answer: $6 million of inflation adjusted dollars (Actual unadjusted value of nearly $60 million)

That is insane, right?!

Those aren’t exceptional earnings numbers or exceptional savings percentages and yet the ending number is absolutely, mind-boggling, exceptional.  This doesn’t even assume huge pay increases or windfalls such as an inheritance.  Just plain, old-fashioned, saving.

The math is simple but the follow through certainly isn’t.  Events such as lay-offs, relocations, and health issues can wreak havoc on even the most well-meaning.  If you’re in one of those rare phases of life, this likely isn’t a priority now.  If you’re not, take a minute to log on to your company website or personal savings account and bump it up.  Even a 1% increase can have a meaningful impact on long-term wealth.

The post How to build multi-generational wealth the old-fashioned way appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

Today, let’s briefly talk about how to find the right holistic advisor and why your deeply held beliefs about what matters are likely rooted in marketing more than fact.

OK, before we get started, let’s get the elephant out of the room.  If I asked you to write down five words that come to mind when you hear “Financial Advisor,” I’m guessing a great deal of them wouldn’t be positive.  Here, I’ll give you a starter list: pushy, salesy, Bernie Madoff, etc.

Certainly not a great stigma.  In fact, financial services scores very low in public trust.  Yes, like all stigmas, they are rooted in some truth.  In this case most of that is historical vs. reality today.

The financial advisory business for retail investors (think: regular people) really exploded in the 1980s and like all new industries there were riches to be made and not a ton of regulation to help cull the excess.  I could write an entire article about the war stories I’ve heard from older advisors – suffice it to say it’s a good thing it doesn’t operate that way anymore.

Even still, there are bad Financial Advisors today just like there are bad doctors, bad engineers, and bad plumbers.  So how do you really know who’s going to be doing the right things for you.  Well, as someone newer to this space, I recommend the following when considering a financial advisor:

1. Review their educational background – For the record, you can call yourself a financial advisor without ever going to college. Shocked?  Me too.  Assuming they went to college, do they have degrees in Finance, Economics, Business Management?  Ask them about their grades.  A lot of people scoff at this notion but seriously, do you want “C” level work when someone is managing your entire financial life?  I wouldn’t.
2. Look at their credentials – The most commonly recognized designation for holistic advisors is the Certified Financial Planner (CFP) designation. I would insist that your advisor has this designation or is at least working on it if they’re a newer advisor.  There are a multitude of other more specialized designations as well.
3. Verify they are supported by a team – I’m sorry but if your advisor is still a, “solo operation” I would be wary. Your advisor relationship will likely span decades.  They will know you better than some members of your family and that is critical in helping you maximize financial value.  So, what happens if you’re advisor gets hit by the proverbial bus tomorrow?  That’s a headache you don’t need.  Insist on a team that knows you and your situation very well.
4. Ask them to review their service model with you – It should include regular communication and an emphasis on connecting you with the best specialists when necessary.

Conclusion: You are entrusting your financial health and well-being to your financial advisor, don’t sell yourself short by just choosing your “golfing buddy” or “the guy from high school.”  At least, not if he doesn’t meet the other criteria above.

The post What You Should Look for In an Advisor appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

Since joining this industry two years ago, the question of “what do you do?” has dogged me.  Not because I don’t enjoy what I do, but rather because the most commonly utilized term for what I do is “financial advisor” and that is a woefully generic title to say the least. 

So let me ask you – Do you know what a Financial Advisor does?

Me either.  That’s because there isn’t one truly accepted definition or standard that really requires a certain level of training or end deliverables to a client.

If you meet someone and they tell you they are a “financial advisor” what they actually do for their clients is still a total mystery.  They could spend their days picking individual stocks, doing tax analysis, creating financial plans, or even selling life insurance.  More than likely, you probably think it doesn’t really matter.  “Aren’t they all the same?” is a refrain I’ve heard a time or two.  Let me share with you why I believe this distinction is critical.

To get there, let’s use a more relatable example – Doctors.

To start, let’s agree that the term Doctor is very generic.  After all, a PhD educated person is Doctor, so is a dentist, a psychiatrist, and a surgeon.  So let’s assume you have a medical need for yourself – a lump in your knee.  You aren’t a medical expert but I’m willing to bet you wouldn’t open a Google search and look for Cardiac Surgeons nearby to help you with your problem.  No, you would probably contact your primary care provider and start with their diagnosis and advice.  After all, that is one of their primary functions – to help refer you to the right expert if the situation requires it.

Furthermore, you certainly wouldn’t have your next door neighbor who is a “doctor” diagnose your lump without first making sure they are qualified and educated to truly help you.

So why on Earth would you approach your finances this way?

I’ve seen it countless times, whether they are friends or new clients.  Individuals who are seeking holistic help with their finances (e.g. college/retirement planning, investment management, insurance needs, etc.) only to end up with a specialist in insurance or taxes that, “does the planning on the side.”

So my question for you today is what exactly are you seeking in your “financial advisor” – a holistic planner to help coordinate and advise on your situation or a specialist for one tactical piece of your finances?

My recommendation – Seek out your holistic advisor first and let them leverage their network of experts to help you.

The post So, what exactly is a Financial Advisor? appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

We will be publishing articles on our site and through social media from time to time.  Our mission for this blog is to educate and engage.

A little bit about me:

My name is Ryan Heider and I will be the primary contributor to the blog along with my colleagues, friends, clients, and anyone else that can add some color and commentary to the world of financial services.

I entered this world two years ago after spending nearly a decade as an engineer and business consultant (feel free to browse more here).  I live in Cleveland, Ohio with my wife and two daughters.

A little bit about our firm:

Our firm, Cirrus Wealth Management, was started in 2015 with one goal in mind – to simplify financial complexity and provide peace of mind for our clients.

We are a holistic advisory firm which means that we advise our clients on a multitude of aspects that impact their financial lives.  Our core focus areas are on financial planning, investment management, life insurance, tax planning, and estate planning.

We work with a diverse population of clients but have carved a niche working with business owners and medical professionals.

Thanks for stopping in and we look forward to sharing this journey with you!

The post Welcome to our Blog appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.

I don’t think this market volatility should be a cause of concern for investors. We’re in an environment where we have historically low unemployment numbers, great corporate growth earnings, and a tax cut. People believed that interest rates could stay at decades low rates and the economy and markets could rise uninterrupted. But, this simply won’t last and investors shouldn’t be afraid when volatility occurs. There’s always worry in the market, but investors should stay the course during times of market volatility.

Watch the full segment below!

The post Yahoo! Finance: Market update with Joe Heider appeared first on Cirrus Wealth Management.