Howard Marks says he used AI tool Perplexity to help write his latest memo
Howard Marks' memos are considered must-reads by many in the financial world, including Warren Buffett. Perplexity, an AI-powered search engine, helped write a chunk of his latest missive.
Marks, the billionaire co-founder and co-chairman of Oaktree Capital Management, has been writing memos for 35 years and turns 80 next year. That makes it perhaps a little surprising that he's drafted in a machine as a contributor.
"In a sign of the times, I'll let my new (and AI-powered) editorial assistant, Perplexity, fill you in on the background," Marks said in a Wednesday memo titled "More on Repealing the Laws of Economics."
The veteran fund manager said he hadn't "changed a word" of Perplexity's output, which was "pretty close to what I would have produced in an hour or two."
In support of his argument for free-market economics and less government intervention, Marks roped in the AI tool to lay out how regulations have distorted the fire insurance sector in California, resulting in widespread underinsurance.
"As Perplexity notes, insurers were told they couldn't price fire policies to reflect increases in the frequency and severity of forest fires," Marks said. "Likewise, they couldn't raise prices to pass through the higher premiums their reinsurers were charging based on the increased frequency and severity."
The distressed-debt investor asked whether a hypothetical insurer would cover a $5 million house with a 1% chance of burning down if the regulator only allowed it to charge $25,000 a year for a policy.
"I didn't need Perplexity to tell me the insurance company faces an expected payout of $50,000 on that policy," Marks said. "The answer's simple: you don't write that policy."
AI tools are divisive. Proponents hail them as productivity boosters that will free workers from mundane tasks and supercharge economic growth. Critics fear they'll stymie learning and development, erode skills, and destroy so many jobs that they cause mass unemployment.
Marks may have embraced AI but he still finds value in human wisdom. In his new memo, he quoted Buffett saying the US fiscal deficit was "unsustainable" and could become "uncontrollable" during Berkshire Hathaway's annual meeting in May.
The Wall Street legend also included his own colourful, incisive comments: "The behavior in Washington with regard to both the fiscal deficit and the precariousness of Social Security remind me of the tale of the guy who jumped off the 20-story building. As he passed the 10th floor, he said, 'so far, so good.'"
Marks may be in his golden years and as skeptical of high-flying assets as ever, yet seems open-minded about innovations.
For example, he went from dismissing bitcoin as "not real" in 2017, to trumpeting its privacy and convenience in 2021 after learning about cryptocurrencies from his son. He's clearly finding uses for AI too.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
As Tariff Uncertainty Continues, Here Are 2 American Companies Investors Should Consider
Most of President Trump's reciprocal tariffs are currently paused, but that may not last much longer. Tariff uncertainty is significantly lower than it was in April, but it isn't gone. If you're worried about tariff uncertainty, investing in American companies with little exposure can be a good idea. 10 stocks we like better than Berkshire Hathaway › It's been a little over two months since President Trump announced his reciprocal tariff plan, sending the S&P 500 briefly plunging to bear market territory. While the S&P has recovered most of its loss since that point, tariff uncertainty remains. Of course, some of the uncertainty has been resolved, specifically when it comes to our trade relationship with China. But there's a lot we don't know yet, such as what happens when the current 90-day pause on retaliatory tariffs expires on July 8? It's entirely possible that the market will become volatile again because of it. There are very few stocks that are truly immune to tariff uncertainty, but top-quality American companies with little foreign exposure could be a good way to protect your portfolio. With that in mind, here are two great American companies you might want to consider for your portfolio right now. I've said before that if I could only buy one stock to hold for the next 20 years, it would be Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A)(NYSE: BRK.B), and I stand by that statement. In fact, with the stock down about 11% from its all-time high reached less than two months ago, I like it even more. There are three main parts to Berkshire's business -- its operating subsidiaries, its stock portfolio, and its cash. Most of Berkshire's operating businesses aren't just American-based revenue streams, but they are highly recession resistant. Think of insurance giant GEICO and Berkshire's massive utility business as a couple of examples. Of course, some of the stocks in Berkshire's nearly $300 billion portfolio have foreign exposure, such as Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL), but it's generally a collection of market-leading businesses with steady cash flow. The cash is the big X-factor here. Berkshire Hathaway has nearly $348 billion in cash on its balance sheet, giving the company unprecedented financial flexibility. So, if tariffs end up causing stocks to fall and business valuations to decline, Berkshire is in a great position to capitalize on it. It's worth noting that the main reason for the stock's recent decline is the announcement that CEO Warren Buffett will be stepping down at the end of the year. But it's important to realize that all of the pieces have been in place for a smooth leadership transition for a long time, and Berkshire should still be an excellent long-term compounding machine. Speaking of Berkshire, it's worth noting that although GEICO is an excellent business, it recently lost its No. 2 market share of U.S. auto insurance to Progressive (NYSE: PGR). Of course, Progressive sells other types of insurance, such as homeowners, but auto insurance is its bread and butter. Although Progressive is often thought of as a legacy insurance company (founded in the 1930s), it has arguably done the most impressive job when it comes to technology and artificial intelligence (AI) in the insurance industry. The company has a first-mover advantage, as it rolled out the first telematics device about 15 years ago to collect driver data and give it an edge in analyzing risk. The company's use of this technology in its underwriting continues to evolve, and the emergence of generative AI has allowed the company to build its technology lead even further. There's still room to grow. In May, Progressive reported 15% year-over-year growth in net premiums earned and a 16% increase in the number of personal insurance policies in force. Progressive's technology lead has not only allowed Progressive to grow its market share but to achieve excellent profitability. In 2024, Progressive reported an underwriting profit margin of more than 11%, while most insurers would be quite content with something in the mid-single digits. As I mentioned, there are few stocks (if any) that would be completely unaffected by tariff escalation. Some of Berkshire's businesses and the stocks it owns have international exposure. And if auto tariffs escalate, it could hurt new car sales, which would have some effect on Progressive (new cars generally cost more to insure than older ones). Not only that, but even if a business is minimally impacted by tariffs, that doesn't mean their stock price won't be turbulent if the trade war heats up. But the point is that these are two fantastic businesses that should hold up better than most if new tariffs go into effect and should be great long-term investments regardless of what happens with tariffs. Before you buy stock in Berkshire Hathaway, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Berkshire Hathaway wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $659,171!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $891,722!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 995% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 172% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join . See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 Matt Frankel has positions in Berkshire Hathaway. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, and Progressive. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. As Tariff Uncertainty Continues, Here Are 2 American Companies Investors Should Consider was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Social Security's 2026 Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) Estimate Is Getting a "Trump Bump" -- Here's How Much Extra You Might Receive
As many as nine out of 10 retirees rely on their Social Security income to cover some portion of their expenses. Estimates for Social Security's 2026 cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) are climbing, and President Trump's tariff and trade policy looks to be the culprit. Though an above-average COLA for a fifth-consecutive year would be welcome on paper, retirees continue to get the short end of the stick when it comes to annual raises. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Last month, Social Security's retired-worker benefit made history, with the average payout topping $2,000 for the first time since the program's inception. Although this represents a modest monthly benefit, it's nevertheless proved vital to helping aging workers cover their expenses. In each of the prior 23 years, pollster Gallup surveyed retirees about their reliance on the Social Security income they're receiving. Between 80% and 90% of respondents noted it was a "major" or "minor" income source. In other words, only around one in 10 retirees could, in theory, make do without their Social Security check. For an overwhelming majority of Social Security beneficiaries, nothing is more important than knowing precisely how much they'll receive each month -- and that begins with the program's annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), which is announced during the second week of October. This year's COLA announcement will be of particular interest, with President Donald Trump's tariff and trade policies expected to directly affect how much Social Security beneficiaries will receive per month in 2026. But before digging into the specifics of how President Trump's policies are expected to impact the pocketbooks of seniors, survivors, and workers with disabilities, it's important to understand the building blocks of what Social Security's COLA is and why it matters. The program's COLA is effectively the "raise" passed along on a near-annual basis that accounts for the impact of inflation (rising prices) on benefits. For example, if a large basket of goods and services increased in cost by 3% from one year to the next, Social Security benefits would need to climb by a commensurate amount, or buying power for Social Security recipients would decrease. In the 35 years following the issuance of the first retired-worker check in January 1940, COLAs were assigned at random by special sessions of Congress. Only a total of 11 COLAs were passed along during this timeline, with no adjustments made in the 1940s. Beginning in 1975, the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W) was adopted as Social Security's inflationary measure that would allow for annual cost-of-living adjustments. The CPI-W has over 200 spending categories, each of which has its own unique percentage weighting. These weightings are what allow the CPI-W to be expressed as a single figure each month, which leads to crisp month-to-month and year-to-year comparisons to see if prices are, collectively, rising (inflation) or declining (deflation). When calculating Social Security's COLA, only CPI-W readings from the third quarter (July through September) are taken into consideration. If the average CPI-W reading in the third quarter of the current year is higher than the comparable period of the previous year, inflation has occurred, and beneficiaries are due for a beefier payout. Following a decade of anemic raises in the 2010s -- three years during the decade (2010, 2011, and 2016) saw no COLA passed along due to deflation -- beneficiaries have enjoyed four consecutive years of above-average cost-of-living adjustments and are hoping for this streak to continue. A historic increase in U.S. money supply during the COVID-19 pandemic sent the prevailing rate of inflation soaring to a four-decade high. This resulted in COLAs of 5.9% in 2022, 8.7% in 2023, 3.2% in 2024, and 2.5% in 2025, respectively. For context, the average annual increase in benefits since 2010 is 2.3%. While estimates for Social Security's 2026 cost-of-living adjustment came in below this average shortly after President Donald Trump took office for his nonconsecutive second term, the script has now been flipped. Nonpartisan senior advocacy group The Senior Citizens League (TSCL) was forecasting a 2.2% COLA for 2026 as recently as March. Meanwhile, independent Social Security and Medicare policy analyst Mary Johnson, who retired from TSCL last year, was calling for a 2.2% increase in April following the release of the March inflation report from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). After the release of the May inflation report from the BLS, both TSCL and Johnson are now forecasting a 2026 COLA of 2.5%. A 2.5% COLA would increase the average retired-worker benefit by $50 per month next year, as well as lift monthly checks for the typical worker with disabilities and survivor beneficiary by $40 and $39, respectively. This 0.3% increase in both forecasts over the past couple of months is estimated to boost the average Social Security payout (for all beneficiaries) by approximately $5.57 per month in 2026. This "Trump bump" is the result of the president's tariff and trade policies having a very modest inflationary impact on domestic prices. Charging a global import duty on all countries while imposing higher "reciprocal tariff rates" on dozens of countries that have historically run adverse trade imbalances with the U.S. can result in these higher costs being passed along to consumers. Though a lot can change with Trump's tariff and trade policy in the coming weeks and months, its current design points to a modest bump in the 2026 COLA. On paper, a fifth consecutive year where COLAs are above average (compared to the previous 16 years) probably sounds great. With the average retired-worker payout cresting $2,000 per month, an added $50 per month would be welcome in 2026. But the fact of the matter is that a 0.3% bump in COLA estimates since Trump introduced his tariff and trade policy doesn't remotely move the needle when it comes to what retirees have been shortchanged for more than a decade. Though the CPI-W is designed to be an all-encompassing measure of inflation, it has an inherent flaw that can be seen in its full name. Specifically, it tracks the spending habits of "urban wage earners and clerical workers," who, in many instances, are working-age Americans not currently receiving a Social Security benefit. Urban wage earners and clerical workers spend their money very differently than seniors. Whereas the former has a higher percentage of their monthly budgets devoted to things like education, apparel, and transportation, seniors spend a higher percentage on shelter and medical care services. Even though an overwhelming majority of Social Security beneficiaries are aged 62 and above, the CPI-W doesn't factor in this added importance of shelter and medical care services inflation. The end result for retirees has been a persistent decline in the buying power of a Social Security dollar. According to a study conducted by TSCL, the purchasing power of a Social Security dollar has dropped by 20% since 2010. A very modest "Trump bump" isn't going to offset this. What's more, the aforementioned two costs that matter most to retirees -- shelter and medical care services -- have had higher trailing-12-month (TTM) inflation rates than the annually issued Social Security COLA. The BLS inflation report for May showed TTM increases of 3.9% for shelter and 3% for medical care services, respectively. As long as the program's cost-of-living adjustment trails the annual inflation rate for these two key expenses, retirees will continue getting the short end of the stick. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Social Security's 2026 Cost-of-Living Adjustment (COLA) Estimate Is Getting a "Trump Bump" -- Here's How Much Extra You Might Receive was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
According to Experts, Here's the Trouble With Social Security Privatization
Social Security privatization would transform the Social Security system as it exists today into one in which individuals are responsible for saving for retirement. Wealthier Americans would likely have greater access to the resources necessary to make the most of self-investing. If the Social Security system is privatized, it could be difficult for less affluent workers to save and invest the funds they'll require in retirement. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Social Security privatization refers to a proposal that would switch the current U.S. Social Security system to one that allows individuals to invest a portion of their payroll taxes in private investment accounts. While the subject produces a lot of excitement, here's what experts say could go wrong. The stock market can produce dizzying fluctuations. While the ups and downs are as natural as the sun rising in the East, they may make less experienced investors quite nervous. For example, when a bear market arrives (another regular, natural part of the economic cycle), individual investors may get spooked and pull their money from the market, a move that can ultimately lead to financial loss. While there are flaws in the current "pay into FICA" system, the upside is knowing how much you can expect to receive each month in Social Security benefits. Privatizing Social Security means some people will invest poorly or not know what to do when market fluctuations hit, potentially leaving them without a stable income in retirement. Some people grow up learning about money management while others do not. Privatization may disadvantage those who have limited financial literacy and limited access to advisors who can help them understand the basics. Those who can afford to hire a financial advisor are likely to do so, giving them a significant advantage over those who cannot afford to work with a professional. The wealthier a person is, the more they can afford to take risks and diversify their portfolios. Those with limited income are likely to have fewer options, a reality experts fear will lead to wider gaps in retirement security. In addition, the wealthier a person is, the easier it is to weather market losses and stick with an investment plan. For the parent or caregiver who must take time off work to meet caregiving responsibilities, it will be more challenging to work the hours needed to accumulate the money required to build a sufficient retirement nest egg. It's natural that some of these people will reach retirement age with little savings to fall back on. Solo investing requires a time commitment. For someone without a financial background, there's a huge learning curve as they navigate a complex array of investment options -- and not everyone has that time. For example, a person focused on building a business, advancing in their career, or spending all their free time caring for others may not have the time necessary to immerse themselves in investment knowledge. From its inception in 1935, Social Security was meant to provide economic security for Americans, particularly retirees. The idea was to ensure all Americans have some source of retirement income. Privatization could undermine that social safety net and leave the most vulnerable populations without the support they need in retirement. Experts fear that those who aren't skilled at investing may fall into poverty in retirement without guaranteed benefits to help lift them out of it. The same is true of those who cannot afford to invest adequately or who experience unexpected financial hardship. As attractive as some people find Social Security privatization, it's difficult to ignore the number of Americans who might fall through the cracks, ultimately entering retirement with little to no money. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. According to Experts, Here's the Trouble With Social Security Privatization was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
