Harvard-trained investor: I've repeated this 6-word mantra daily since I was 20—it helped me become more successful than most
Alexa von Tobel starts every day on a positive note — a function of the "daily mantra" the Harvard University-trained investor has repeated every day for the past two decades, she says.
"I've had it, probably, since I was 20: 'Get up, dress up, show up,'" says von Tobel, 41. "[It means] get up early, get dressed and show up with a very positive attitude."
A founder and managing partner of venture fund Inspired Capital, von Tobel says she typically wakes up by 6 a.m. to "get ahead" of her three children and exercise so she can be "ready to take on the day in a powerful way."
That positive outlook helped give her the confidence to drop out of Harvard Business School and move to New York to launch a startup at age 24, she says. The startup was online financial advisory LearnVest, which she founded as startups struggled to access venture capital amid the start of the Great Recession.
Von Tobel credits a detailed, 75-page business plan and her own unshakeable conviction for her ability to raise more than $1 million from investors within a year of launching. "There was just an absolute desert of capital and my mindset was, like, 'There's only one plan. It's plan A and we'll figure it out," she says.Building a successful business — LearnVest reached 1.5 million users before selling to Northwestern Mutual for a reported $375 million in 2015 — required "extreme trust in my ability to figure things out, [which] stems from this very positive outlook," adds von Tobel.
Every entrepreneur should develop their own version of a relentlessly optimistic mindset about their business, so they can build the confidence and resilience they'll need to forge ahead while weathering inevitable setbacks, she says.
"It's natural to me, [but] the mindset of, literally, 'the impossible is possible' is very important for an entrepreneur: to only look for the path to make something successful, and the sheer commitment to extremely detailed positive thinking to make [that] happen," von Tobel says.
Positive thinking can provide real benefits ranging from reduced stress and better overall health to increased productivity and improved problem-solving skills, research shows. It can be especially powerful when combined with diligent preparation and a commitment to hard work — particularly important traits in the business world, according to serial entrepreneur and Stanford University adjunct professor Steve Blank.
Skipping out on research and preparation is the "biggest mistake" people make that often leads to failure in business, Blank told CNBC Make It in March. Billionaire Mark Cuban touts a similar message, phrased more bluntly: "You [need to] know your s--- better than anyone else in the room," he told GQ in 2022.
Some other successful entrepreneurs agree. "Positive thinking is [an] incredibly powerful tool," billionaire Richard Branson wrote in a 2018 blog post. "Simply put: positive, proactive behavior spurs positive, proactive behavior."
You can boost your own positivity by avoiding constantly comparing yourself to others and working on how you judge yourself, psychologists say. Replacing self-criticism with self-compassion — everyone makes mistakes, and you can learn something from every setback — can help shift your mindset from negative to positive, according to leadership and mental strength expert Scott Mautz.
"Stop all that negative inner chatter — the destructive thoughts, beliefs, and attitudes that take over..." Mautz wrote in August. "Instead, talk to yourself as you would to a friend in need, with compassion and empathy."
Von Tobel is also right, according to author and financial therapist Aja Evans: Regular uplifting affirmations genuinely help, too. They can help "fortify you, so when the crisis does come, you truly believe that you can handle it," Evans said in December.
,
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
35 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Weak dollar reprises its role as 'carry' trade funder
By Nimesh Vora MUMBAI (Reuters) - The U.S. dollar's weakness since the start of Donald Trump's presidency has made it the preferred funding currency for popular "carry" trades, fuelling heavy flows into higher-yielding emerging market currencies. Dollar-funded carry trades in the Indonesian rupiah, Indian rupee, Brazilian real, Turkish lira among other currencies, are back in vogue, fund managers said. In a typical currency carry trade, investors use cheap-to-borrow currencies to fund investments in those with better yields. Returns are boosted if the borrowed currency weakens. The dollar, traditionally less favoured than the Japanese yen or Swiss franc for such trades, has become the funding currency of choice as Trump's trade war stokes recession worries and an investor retreat from U.S. Treasuries. Carl Vermassen, a portfolio manager at Zurich-based asset manager Vontobel, has added to carry trades on the rupee and rupiah. "Emerging market local currency was basically shunned for the simple reason: to avoid local currency risk at a time of an almighty dollar," he said. "But, given most investors deem U.S. exceptionalism to have ended, things are changing." Claudia Calich, head of emerging market debt at M&G Investments, also expects dollar weakness to persist and support carry trades. The London-headquartered fund oversees more than 312 billion pounds ($423.5 billion) and favours the rupee and Philippine peso for carry positions within Asia and the Brazilian real and Mexican peso in Latin America. The more investors rush back into dollar carry trades, the deeper the dollar's losses are likely to be, analysts said. The dollar index has fallen 8.5% so far this year, dropping below the critical 100 mark in mid-April for the first time in nearly two years. It was last seen at 99.30. That means investors are finding good carry not just in the likes of the rupee and rupiah, whose yields are above those in the United States, but even those with low interest rates such as the South Korean won. The won has led gains in Asian currencies this year with a 6.7% rally against the dollar. The yield advantage over dollars, or the "carry", measured by the three-month tenure is 2% on the Indian rupee and 1.2% for Indonesia's rupiah. Brazil's real gives a much higher carry at 9% but is far more volatile, meaning the trade could go horribly wrong if the currency depreciates, instead of appreciating. The future expected 3-month volatility, also called implied volatility, for the real is 8.1% compared with 4.7% for the rupee. Goldman Sachs said carry trades were "a big theme" in recent meetings with its New York clients, with interest growing in Latin American and European markets. "If volatility settles some more, we will start to hear more about dollar-funded carry trades," ING Bank said. "This could be a story for this summer." HUGE INFLOWS Since "FX carry trades" typically involve investments in bond or money markets in these destinations, analysts expect to see heavy flows into emerging markets. Data for April shows investors bought bonds worth $8.92 billion, the highest for any month since last August, in South Korea, India, Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia. While some of those flows could have been straight real-money investments into these markets, analysts say carry trades also boomed. In South Korea, foreign investors bought $7.91 billion in bonds, the most since May 2023. Tom Nakamura, vice-president and head of fixed income & currencies at Canadian fund AGF Investments, finds carry trades in Turkey attractive since the central bank's adoption of more orthodox monetary policy. Turkey's benchmark rates are at 46%.
Forbes
7 hours ago
- Forbes
Congress Cracks Down On U.S. Universities' Ties To China
(Photo by) Getty Images Scrutiny of China's role in American universities is intensifying on Capitol Hill and fast becoming one of the most aggressive and sustained bipartisan oversight campaigns in Washington. While attention has predictably focused on recent actions by the executive branch such as the Trump Administration's efforts to preclude foreign students from enrolling at Harvard University, or its pause on new student visa interviews, Congressional scrutiny on the nexus between American colleges and China predates those actions and is already far-reaching. Over the past several years, Congress has laid the groundwork for a broader, more structural crackdown on how U.S. universities interact with Chinese institutions, researchers and students. That work is now entering a more public and punitive phase. For years, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have raised concerns about China exploiting the openness of U.S. universities to advance its military and technological ambitions. As far back as 2019, Senate hearings and reports warned that Chinese government-linked entities were using academic partnerships to facilitate technology transfers and undermine research integrity. Lawmakers are continuing to sound the alarm. 'Our technological landscape has evolved rapidly during the last quarter century,' says Congressman Derek Tran (D-CA), the son of Vietnamese refugees who currently serves on the House Armed Services Committee. 'Congress must ensure that our national security and oversight responsibilities keep pace with the innovation produced by our universities and Capitol Hill must remain laser-focused on confronting these national security challenges.' Congress is now going further and faster than it has in the past toward this end. Lawmakers are now wielding bipartisan power, drafting sweeping legislation and conducting relentless oversight to curb China's growing academic foothold. Congress is no longer merely issuing warnings but formulating and implementing policy. From reforms to Section 117 of the Higher Education Act, to proposed new powers for CFIUS, legislators are crafting an expansive web of legislative constraints designed to significantly curb Chinese influence across the U.S. higher education landscape. This shift is most visible in mounting congressional pressure on U.S. universities to sever academic ties with Chinese institutions. Once framed as benign, these partnerships are increasingly cast as potential vectors for foreign influence or technology transfers. In early 2025, House Select Committee on China Chairman John Moolenaar (R-MI) and House Education Committee Chairman Tim Walberg (R-MI) deployed letters to Eastern Michigan University (EMU), Oakland University and the University of Detroit Mercy urging them to terminate partnerships with Chinese universities. EMU responded by ending its engineering teaching programs with Guangxi University and Beibu Gulf University, noting that while these programs did not involve research or technology transfer, the university prioritized national security concerns. Oakland University similarly announced the discontinuation of programs with three Chinese institutions. The University of Detroit Mercy indicated it is in the process of dissolving its partnerships, emphasizing that the programs were solely for undergraduate teaching without any research components. Similarly, Duke University has come under congressional scrutiny for its joint venture with Wuhan University known as Duke Kunshan University (DKU). Lawmakers expressed concerns that the partnership could facilitate access to sensitive U.S. technologies by the Chinese government, and urged Duke to reevaluate its partnership with DKU. Beyond these institutional arrangements, Congress has sought detailed information about Chinese nationals studying at elite U.S. universities. In March 2025, the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party requested data from institutions including Stanford University seeking information on Chinese students' academic backgrounds, research affiliations and funding sources. The committee cited concerns that Chinese students in STEM programs might be part of a systematic effort by the Chinese government to acquire sensitive technologies. Harvard University is facing similar scrutiny, with lawmakers demanding explanations for its collaborations with Chinese entities linked to military and sanctioned organizations. The inquiry focuses on potential dual-use research and partnerships that could inadvertently support China's military advancements. Congressional scrutiny of Harvard University comes at a time when the Trump Administration is aggressively focusing on that elite institution and has announced it will 'aggressively revoke' visas for Chinese students with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in 'critical fields.' The measure has prompted some lawmakers to call for a more nuanced approach. 'We should not have a blanket ban on Chinese and international students coming to the United States,' says Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), who represents Silicon Valley in Congress and serves on the House Select Committee on China. 'It will hurt our leadership in the world and is not consistent with our values.' Congress has proposed several legislative measures aimed at increasing transparency and reducing foreign influence in U.S. higher education. The Defending Education Transparency and Ending Rogue Regimes Engaging in Nefarious Transactions (DETERRENT) Act seeks to amend Section 117 of the Higher Education Act by lowering the reporting threshold for foreign gifts and contracts from $250,000 to $50,000 and to any gift or contract from countries of concern, including China. The act also proposes prohibiting contracts with certain foreign entities and requiring disclosures of foreign investments within university endowments. Additionally, the House has advanced legislation that would restrict Department of Homeland Security funding to U.S. universities maintaining relationships with specific Chinese institutions, particularly those tied to China's military or intelligence services. These legislative efforts underscore a growing bipartisan commitment to safeguarding U.S. academic institutions from potential foreign exploitation, signaling a significant shift in the landscape of international academic collaboration. The consensus on China's influence is one of the few bipartisan constants in an otherwise fractured political landscape. American universities should expect more hearings, more target letters, more proposals and ultimately more laws. Congress has made clear that academic openness cannot come at the expense of national security. As the scope of scrutiny widens, American universities will have to strike a new balance—one that safeguards their missions while addressing mounting concerns on Capitol Hill.
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Yahoo
Is the Housing Bubble Finally Losing Pressure?
The past few years have been a whirlwind for homebuyers, from a pandemic-driven housing boom to inflation-induced interest rate hikes that made borrowing increasingly expensive. As it stands today, many people looking for an abode are getting clobbered by a one-two punch: arm-and-a-leg home prices and stubbornly elevated mortgage rates. That means, for many Americans, going to open houses is basically worth it only for the complimentary canapés, a consolation snack while they restrain their homeownership ambitions until better market conditions arise (fingers crossed). The spring season, typically the housing market's busiest, hasn't provided much cause for optimism: Existing home sales fell 0.5% in April from March, according to the National Association of Realtors. Home sales for each month fell to their weakest since 2009, when the Great Recession was in full swing following the subprime mortgage crisis. In February, JPMorgan analysts were muted about the US housing market's prospects, writing it was 'likely to remain largely frozen through 2025.' But a notable new report last week from Redfin argued that some air may be let out of the bubble soon, much to the advantage of prospective buyers. The big reason, according to the brokerage's analysis: Sellers now outnumber buyers by nearly half a million, the biggest gap on record since 2013. So, could the most favorable ratio for buyers in over a decade give them enough leverage to close deals and even bring prices down? Let's take a look (and, if not, there'll always be the canapés). READ ALSO: Shrinking GDP Shows Tariffs' Impact as Courts Scrutinize Their Legality and E.l.f. Soars After $1 Billion Pow(d)er Move to buy Hailey Bieber's Rhode First, a quick catchup on the forces that brought us to this place. During the pandemic, housing demand went through the roof. As Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco researchers explained, that was thanks mainly to the massive shift to remote work, a 'key factor explaining why U.S. house prices grew 24% between November 2019 and November 2021.' San Francisco Bay-area tech workers could suddenly take their high incomes and buy homes in cheaper (for them; sorry, locals) Austin, Texas, or Denver, Colorado. Wall Street professionals could do the same in Miami or Tampa Bay, Florida. By 2022, Federal Reserve Board economists estimated that 'new construction would have had to increase by roughly 300% to absorb the pandemic-era surge in demand.' Instead, the mushrooming demand prompted the housing market to overheat. In November 2021, for example, there were 2.3 million prospective homebuyers versus 1.4 million sellers, giving the latter a significant market advantage. In April, five years after pandemic lockdowns, the median US existing home price hit $414,000, a new peak for that month, according to the National Association of Realtors, which noted home prices have risen on a year-over-year basis for 22 straight months. In addition to increasingly expensive homes, another challenge for buyers emerged in 2022, when the Federal Reserve began hiking interest rates to curb the highest inflation surge in decades. That was back when we were fretting about supply-chain snarls caused by the pandemic (now we fret about supply-chain snarls due to tariff wars). Mortgage rates, which tend to track interest rates, had been incredibly favorable when the Fed cut interest rates to record lows to stimulate the economy at the onset of the pandemic. They spiked after the Fed kicked off a series of rate hikes in early 2022, however. These factors helped bring the pandemic housing boom to a halt: Those 2.3 million buyers in November 2021 declined all the way to 1.5 million by November 2022. Now, the number of sellers far outstrips the number of buyers. Redfin's new analysis found that there are an estimated 490,041 more home-sellers in the US than prospective buyers, a sharp reversal from the pandemic housing boom. 'The balance of power in the US housing market has shifted toward buyers, but a lot of sellers have yet to see or accept the writing on the wall,' Asad Khan, the brokerage's chief economist, says in the report. 'Many are still holding out hope that their home is the exception and will fetch top dollar. But as sellers see their homes sit longer on the market and notice fewer buyers coming through on tour, more of them will realize that the market has adjusted and reset their expectations accordingly.' Fretting about tariffs has helped suppress the number of Americans shopping for a home, with a survey finding just under a quarter of them canceled plans to make major purchases because of Washington's trade-warring and another third delayed plans. That means less competition for the buyers in the field. Meanwhile, Redfin predicts that home prices will fall 1% year over year by the end of 2025, with the glut of sellers forming the bedrock of its reasoning. Unsurprisingly, many of the markets where the balance of power has shifted the most for homebuyers, according to the report, are the same places where the pandemic housing boom occurred. Of the 50 most populous metro areas in the US, the top buyer's market is now Miami, according to Redfin. Where it once was flooded with homebuyers attracted to the idea of warm weather and beaches enhancing a work-from-home lifestyle, it now has roughly 21,000 sellers compared with just 7,000 buyers, or a 197% difference. Another notable metro area is Austin, which drew an influx of tech workers during the pandemic. It has a 124% ratio of sellers to buyers and even saw its median home sale price fall 3% year-over-year in April. Jacksonville and Tampa, both in Florida, as well as Phoenix, Arizona, also experienced year-over-year declines in median home sale prices. 'It's not uncommon for a buyer to get a home for 5% less than the list price and $10,000 in seller concessions,' one Daytona Beach, Florida-based Redfin realtor noted in the firm's report. Highly Rated. Even if the balance of power has shifted, one factor dogging buyers remains stubbornly unfazed: mortgage rates. Forecasts had initially predicted they would fall this year, based on expectations that the Federal Reserve would cut the benchmark interest rates undergirding a wide swath of lending costs as inflation softened. That hope has been repeatedly dashed due to the economic uncertainty accompanying the Trump administration's shifting economic policies. Until the Fed is certain conditions warrant a rate cut, higher interest rates will continue propping up mortgage costs. Another benchmark for mortgage rates, Treasury yields, has simultaneously been driven up because the US credit rating was downgraded over concerns about the country's swelling budget deficit. The 30-year fixed mortgage rate as of May 29 was 6.89%, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. Since 2023, mortgage rates have hovered well above 6%, often closer to 7%, at roughly the highest levels in two decades. Redfin expects them to stay there through the rest of the year, predicting mortgage rates will float around 6.8%. So, while lower housing prices have arrived in some markets and may be on the way in others where buying power has shifted, mortgage rates are likely to remain a relative thorn in the side of buyers due to economic factors far beyond their control. If tariffs are levied on imported goods at the scale the Trump administration has threatened, that may spur more inflation and make it even harder for the Fed to cut rates. Unfortunately, while real estate agents might be able to get you 5% off the list price for your dream house, they can't negotiate away the nascent global trade war and Congress' bipartisan habit of spending beyond its means. This post first appeared on The Daily Upside. To receive delivering razor sharp analysis and perspective on all things finance, economics, and markets, subscribe to our free The Daily Upside newsletter.
