Latest news with #Macrotrends
Morocco World
2 hours ago
- Business
- Morocco World
No Country for Old Age? Morocco Stalls at the Edge of a Graying Future
Rabat – As Morocco navigates the 21st century, the country finds itself at the cusp of a quiet but still powerful demographic shift. Declining fertility, rising infertility rates, longer life expectancy, and evolving social structures are all converging to produce one unavoidable reality: Morocco is aging. The country is going through a demographic shift as the number of persons aged 60+ is expected to more than double between 2020-2050. To ensure every person can lead an independent and dignified life at any age, and their communities benefit from the demographic dividend, national policies and systems across all sectors must address the well-being and rights of individuals across this life course. While this trend is not unique to Morocco, the country's particular socio-economic landscape poses unique challenges. With no clearly defined or publicly shared national plan to address the coming 'gray wave,' questions are mounting over whether Morocco is doing enough to prepare for a future where a growing portion of its citizens will be older, more vulnerable, and in need of targeted support. A rapidly aging population Morocco's demographic indicators have shifted dramatically over the past four decades. The fertility rate, for instance, went through fluctuations, all pointing towards a downward trend. According to data from Macrotrends, Morocco's fertility rate has been gradually declining over the past few years. In 2025, it stands at 2.26, marking a 0.92% decrease from 2024. The previous year recorded a rate of 2.28, following a 0.87% drop from 2023. Women are marrying later, often due to rising education levels, economic uncertainty, and changing cultural expectations. As of 2022, the number of marriages in Morocco stood at around 252,000. The number decreased compared to the previous year, when it reached a low of approximately 270,000. Previously, marriages in the country decreased gradually from 2018 to 2020, data from Statista shows. Infertility, too, is on the rise, with a national health survey estimating that over 12% of Moroccan couples face fertility challenges. These trends mean that while Morocco is still classified as a 'young country,' the age structure is evolving fast. According to projections by Morocco's High Commission for Planning (HCP), the population of people aged 60 and over in Morocco is projected to grow at an average annual rate of 3.3% between 2014 and 2050. Their numbers are expected to more than triple over this period, rising from 3.2 million to 10.1 million. By 2050, this age group would account for 23.2% of the country's total population. The implications are far-reaching, affecting everything from healthcare and pensions to labor markets, housing, and family life. Inadequate infrastructure, the digital divide Despite these clear signals, Morocco's approach to aging remains fragmented and, in many cases, inadequate. Pension systems exist, notably through the Moroccan Pension Fund (CMR) and the National Social Security Fund (CNSS), but their coverage is limited, especially for people who spent their lives working in the informal economy. With many essential services now digitized, older adults face significant barriers. Accessing CNSS benefits, renewing medical cards, or registering for health coverage often requires digital skills and internet access that many senior citizens simply do not have. When they go to CNSS offices to inquire about their pensions or seek basic information, many — if not all — older Moroccans often find themselves unable to even queue without a prior online appointment, a requirement that assumes digital access and literacy. Many of these individuals are frail, unwell, or come from remote areas. They may not own smartphones or know how to use them, and the physical strain of waiting in long lines only adds to their hardship. For the senior population, digital exclusion can mean being effectively locked out of vital services. While digital transformation is an important goal for Morocco's administrative modernization, it currently risks alienating a large and growing segment of the population. Grim reality? Morocco's health system is not yet equipped to meet the needs of an aging population. Geriatric care remains a neglected specialty, with few medical professionals trained specifically to care for older adults. Hospitals and clinics often lack the resources or capacity to deal with age-related conditions, such as dementia, cardiovascular diseases, and mobility issues. Out-of-pocket health expenditures are high in Morocco, creating another layer of vulnerability for seniors, particularly those living alone or without family support. While the rollout of AMO (Compulsory Health Insurance) under CNSS has expanded access to basic healthcare, the system's gaps remain acute. A survey published in January by the market research group Sunergia sheds light on the stark realities of retirement in Morocco, revealing significant gaps and enduring inequalities. While 59% of Moroccans are covered by employer-provided retirement plans, only 5% have secured coverage on their own. Workers in the informal sector and retirees from private companies make up the majority of those with individual plans, with just 10% and 13% in each group reporting independent coverage. More troubling, however, is the finding that 36% of Moroccans have no retirement coverage at all, a figure that soars to 86% among those working in the informal economy, exposing the severe vulnerability of this population. Although the government has been reviewing the pension system to address its shortcomings and improve retirement coverage, many people remain dissatisfied, especially with the ongoing inflation and rising cost of living, as the results have yet to bring noticeable improvements or alleviate widespread concerns about inequality and accessibility. In January, the Civil Pensioners' Organization of Morocco (ORCM) raised serious concerns about the deteriorating conditions retirees are facing across the country. The organization criticized successive governments for neglecting this vulnerable group and showing little regard for the growing financial pressures retirees endured amid ongoing inflation. Their planned protest followed recent government debates on pension reform , which resulted in an approved amendment to the 2025 Finance Bill (PLF 2025) that gradually exempted basic retirement pensions from income tax. Starting in January 2025, retirees receiving basic pensions were set to benefit from a 50% tax reduction, moving toward full exemption by 2026. However, this relief applied only to basic pensions and regulated lifetime annuities; complementary pensions, which tended to be higher due to additional savings, remained taxable to preserve state revenues. Despite this measure, retirees argued that the reform failed to meet their real needs. While it offered them some financial relief, many pensioners continued to struggle with low pensions that did not cover essential living costs like food and daily necessities. Is pension reform enough? Pension reform has long been a recurring issue in Morocco's policy landscape, discussed, debated, and revisited over the years without a definitive resolution. Its persistence reflects both the structural complexity of the system and the wide-reaching consequences of any proposed changes. Despite repeated efforts by successive governments, striking a balance between financial sustainability and social equity has proven elusive, keeping the issue at the forefront of public debate. The government introduced in December last year a new measure under the 2025 Finance Bill (PLF 2025), to ease the financial burden on retirees. The amendment, approved by Parliament, sets out a phased exemption of basic retirement pensions from income tax. Starting in January 2025, beneficiaries under the basic regime began receiving a 50% tax deduction, with a full exemption planned for 2026. Budget Minister Delegate Fouzi Lekjaa described the reform as a step toward alleviating the economic pressure facing Morocco's aging population. However, the measure is limited in scope. It applies only to basic pensions and regulated lifetime annuities, while complementary pensions, which are often higher due to individual savings, remain taxable to preserve fiscal revenue. Although the reform marked a move in the right direction, retirees argued it fell short of meeting their broader demands for a dignified standard of living. Chief among their calls were immediate pension increases, particularly for those in low- and middle-income brackets, as well as stronger representation on pension fund boards and in social service associations across the public and private sectors. Healthcare also remained a critical concern. Pensioners demanded not only improved access to quality medical care but also full exemption from costs not covered by the country's basic health insurance systems (AMO and CNOPS). 'Retirees have contributed to the system throughout their working lives,' many argued, 'and should not be forced to shoulder additional expenses for services they rightfully deserve.' The decline of the traditional family model Morocco's aging challenge is not only institutional but also cultural. For generations, elderly Moroccans relied on their families, particularly daughters and daughters-in-law, for care and companionship. Today, that model is increasingly under strain. Urban migration, emigration, women's increased labor force participation, and rising individualism mean that many elderly Moroccans now live alone or in households where traditional care roles are no longer feasible. The assumption that family will always step in to support the elderly is no longer guaranteed. At the same time, there are few viable alternatives. Morocco lacks a strong network of community-based elder care facilities. Public retirement homes are scarce, underfunded, and often stigmatized. Private facilities, where they exist, are expensive and inaccessible to most. The result is a growing number of elderly people, especially women, left in precarious situations. Some rely on the goodwill of neighbors or distant relatives. Others live in isolation, with limited access to social interaction, mobility, or basic assistance. A missing national vision So far, Morocco has not articulated a comprehensive vision for aging. While the government has introduced some pilot programs, such as awareness campaigns, health screenings, and limited income support initiatives, these remain scattered and often confined to major urban centers. A national aging strategy would need to address multiple fronts. It would also require confronting uncomfortable questions: What happens when traditional caregiving roles no longer hold? How can Morocco create an inclusive society for its elders without placing the burden solely on families? Aging is not a crisis in itself, it is a natural outcome of progress. Longer lives reflect better healthcare, education, and living standards. But without planning, this progress can turn into pressure. Morocco's aging wave is inevitable, but its consequences are not. With thoughtful, inclusive, and forward-looking policy, the country can turn this demographic transition into an opportunity to reimagine how society treats its elders. Without bold leadership and a clear national vision, Morocco risks entering this new era unprepared, leaving its elderly citizens adrift in a system that was not designed with them in mind. Whether this 'silver future' becomes a dignified chapter in Morocco's development or a missed opportunity depends on choices made today.
Fox News
18 hours ago
- Politics
- Fox News
Communist country dumps decades-old 2-child policy as birth rates plummet to alarming levels
Vietnam has ended its two-child policy in hopes of a resurgence of youth in an aging population. The communist country's National Assembly passed a new amendment that nullifies families from having a two-child limit, according to state media. Vietnamese families are giving birth to fewer children and the birth rate has declined to 1.91 children per woman in 2024, state media said, and this is a trend that is especially true in the urban areas like Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City, where there are higher living costs. Vietnam's two-child limit originated in the 1960s in Northern Vietnam to help prevent overpopulation, the Guardian reported. After the reunification of Northern and Southern Vietnam, the two-child policy was encouraged throughout the entire country to prevent overpopulation and bring about a "golden population." It wasn't until 1993 that the policy was formalized as a national policy with the goal of controlling overpopulation. According to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), the proportion of citizens under 15 has declined dramatically from 43% to under 25% in comparison to the entire population. The study by the UNFPA shows that the population of citizens aged 15 to 64 years has increased from 53% to 69%. According to a study by birth rates continuously dropped until 2003, and then saw a steady rise until 2013, when the free fall began again. According to state media, Vietnam's "golden population" started in 2007, and is expected to continue between 2038 and 2040. Today, Vietnam's population is estimated to be more than 101 million people, making it the 16th-most populous country globally and third-largest in Southeast Asia. The Ministry of Health noted that gender-selective births have been one of the causes of the gender imbalance in Vietnam. The imbalance of male to female births grew from 103 boys per 100 girls in 2006 to 111 boys per 100 girls in 2024. To help counter this, the ministry has proposed raising the fine from 30 million to 100 million Vietnamese dong — roughly $1,150 to around $4,000 — for gender-selective practices. According to The Associated Press, China imposed a one-child policy in 1979 amid worries about overpopulation. As the country has faced growing concerns about an aging population, it has been slowly easing the policy to allow a second child and then a third child in 2021, but with little success in boosting birthrates.
Forbes
29-05-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Global Military Spending Surges As Arms Control Mechanisms Collapse
At the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit last year in Washington D.C., the corresponding press release noted that arms control, disarmament, and non-proliferation remained critical to achieving the organization's security objectives. With the war in Ukraine still going strong, global trends in military spending are not reflecting these objectives. A range of escalating security challenges has triggered destabilizing arms races worldwide. Global military spending reached $2.7 trillion in 2024, representing a 9.4% jump in real terms from 2023. Unsurprisingly, Ukraine and Russia have dramatically boosted their military budgets. Ukraine's military spending surged 640% between 2021 and 2022, according to while Russia's rose by 31%. In 2024, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute released a report showing that Ukraine allocates $64.7 billion — roughly 24% of its gross domestic product — to defense, whereas Russia spends about $149 billion, or 7% of its GDP. But the arms build-up is not limited to Russia and Ukraine. Over the past decade, more than 100 countries have expanded their defense budgets. Including Russia, European military spending climbed 17% to $693 billion in 2024, the same SIPRI report found. With the exception of Malta, all European countries increased their military spending in 2024. Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump announced a military budget of almost a trillion dollars for 2026, including at least $175 billion for a Golden Dome Defense System— a layered missile shield designed to protect the U.S. from long-range and hypersonic missiles, which travel at over five times the speed of sound. In response to the news, Beijing called the Golden Dome 'deeply destabilising in nature.' Yet for the last two decades China has been investing in hypersonic weapons— which follow unpredictable paths and can be maneuvered mid-flight, making them difficult to intercept. China's military modernization, marked by three decades of consecutive growth, saw spending rise 7% to $314 billion in 2024. This surge sharply contrasts with global trends in military spending several decades ago. From 1983 to 1993, world military expenditures dropped over 40% in proportion to GDP, from 5.7% to 3.3% of world GDP. The 1990s remain the decade with the fewest state-based conflict deaths since the 1950s, raising questions about the causal relationship between military spending and conflict. Today's arms race unfolds after the repeated failure of critical arms control agreements. The last remaining treaty between the U.S. and Russia on nuclear weapons is New START, which was signed by then leaders Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev in April of 2010. Though an agreement was made in March of 2021 to extend the treaty, after Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February of 2022 and Russia's subsequent refusal to submit to on-site inspections several months later, Moscow officially stopped participating in the treaty the following February. Russia also withdrew from the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty in May of 2023 (which bans nuclear test explosions) and the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty in November 2023. Even as U.S. President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin continue to engage in talks about the war in Ukraine, the status of New START (which expires in 2026) and its future replacement remain unknown. Russia has rejected any nuclear arms control talks with the U.S. arguing that the West would first have to change its 'anti-Russian attitudes.' This wasn't the first time that Russia reneged on an arms' control agreement. One of the notable cases was Russia's development of the Novator 9M729 (first test fired in 2014), a cruise missile which has a range of 2,500 km, which violated the landmark 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. The INF prohibited the US and Russia (then the Soviet Union) from developing and deploying ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with a range between 500 and 5,500km, eliminating an entire category of nuclear weapons. As concerns about Russia's pursuit of ground-based missiles persisted, the U.S. withdrew from the INF in 2019. Russia's INF breaches likely spurred NATO and its allies to enhance their own long range strike capabilities. The U.S. and Germany announced in 2024 that Germany would host ground based medium range missiles (including SM-6, Tomahawk missiles, and hypersonic weapons) which can target Russia directly by 2026. Though these missiles are designed to only carry conventional warheads, they sparked a reaction from Moscow that additional nuclear tipped medium range missiles could be deployed. Russia further alarmed the West by unveiling an intermediate range ballistic missile called the Oreshnik in Dnipro, Ukraine – capable of carrying six nuclear tipped warheads and striking European capitals within 12 to 16 minutes. Meanwhile France, Germany and Poland signed a letter of intent committing to agree to jointly produce their own medium-range missiles, with a range over 500 km. As for the U.S., in addition to its investment in the Golden Dome, Washington. is accumulating an arsenal of ground-launched strike systems with ranges exceeding 500 kilometres, and working to become a hypersonic missile superpower over concerns of China's rising power. This arms race between the U.S. in China is especially concerning given that there is no bilateral arms control agreement, and alongside Russia, neither country has ratified the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. While China signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of nuclear weapons in 1992 (the U.S. and the Soviet Union signed in 1968), it does not adhere to the spirit of the treaty, having increased its nuclear arsenal considerably. By 2030, the PRC will potentially possess over 1,000 operational warheads, while Russia and the U.S. each possess over 5,000. With arms' control talks increasingly sidelined, the arms race of the 21st century is not only more expensive than during the Cold War, but potentially more dangerous.
Time of India
10-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Cost of conflict: How India and Pakistan spend their money on defence
Amidst escalating tensions following the Pahalgam attack and ongoing cross-border conflicts, India's military spending significantly outpaces Pakistan's. India's 2024-25 defense budget reached $86.1 billion, while Pakistan's stood at $10.2 billion. This disparity reflects India's focus on military modernization and indigenous production, contrasting with Pakistan's economic constraints and reliance on foreign aid. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Operation Sindoor, which the Indian military launched to avenge the Pakistan-sponsored Pahalgam attack, has turned from a one-time strike to extended conflict as Pakistan is attacking dozens of Indian cities with drones and bombing civilians on the LoC and India is responding to the is a scope for potential escalation and even a full-scale war. India has over the past few years significantly ramped up its defence capabilities with indigenous manufacturing and key purchases such as Rafale fighter jets. Pakistan too has been a big defence spender but there are stark contrasts with India, shaped by historical, economic, and geopolitical military expenditure is significantly higher than Pakistan's, reflecting both the size of the country and its strategic priorities. India's military spending for 2024-25, which ranks fifth-highest in the world, saw a 1.6% increase, totaling $86.1 billion during the year, while Pakistan's military expenditure stood at $10.2 billion, according to data by Stockholm International Peace Research disparity in budgets highlights the difference in both scale and ambition, with India investing heavily in modernising its military to strengthen its the trend of disparity between the two countries' military budgets is nothing new. For years, India has consistently allocated a far larger amount of money to the defence sector. In comparison, Pakistan's defence budget remains smaller, reflecting its economic constraints and a strategic focus on maintaining essential military defence budget has grown steadily over the past decade. According to data from Macrotrends, India's military spending in 2013 stood at $41 billion, and by 2024, this figure has nearly doubled to $80 increase reflects India's commitment to building a more modern and technologically advanced military force, capable of defending against regional and global challenges. The rising budget supports significant investments in air force modernisation, naval assets, missile systems, and an expanding nuclear of the primary drivers of India's defence spending is its ongoing efforts to enhance its strategic capabilities. India is working on strengthening its indigenous production of weapons systems, including fighter jets and missile technology, to reduce dependency on foreign suppliers. Projects like the Tejas fighter aircraft and the Agni-series of missiles are part of this self-reliance India is enhancing its cyber warfare and space-based capabilities, crucial for modern military spending, while considerably lower than India's, continues to be a significant part of its national budget. According to SIPRI data, Pakistan's defence expenditure in 2024 was estimated at $11 billion. Although this figure is relatively modest, it constitutes a significant proportion of Pakistan's GDP, underlining the centrality of defence to its national security military spending is largely driven by its need to maintain a credible defence against India's conventional superiority. Pakistan's focus remains on ensuring that its military can counterbalance India's larger and more technologically advanced this end, Pakistan has concentrated its spending on maintaining nuclear capabilities and enhancing its missile systems. The development of tactical nuclear weapons has been a key element of Pakistan's strategy, aimed at deterring any potential conventional attack by also faces domestic economic challenges that constrain its ability to increase defence spending, making it reliant on foreign aid and loans, particularly from the IMF, China and the to the Global Firepower Index, India ranks 4th globally with a PowerIndex score of 0.1184, while Pakistan stands 12th with a score of 0.2513. In virtually every category—manpower, airpower, naval strength—India holds a formidable a population of over 1.4 billion, India commands an available manpower pool of 662 million, compared to Pakistan's 108 million. Active personnel: 1.45 million (India) vs. 654,000 (Pakistan).India operates 2,229 aircraft, including 513 fighters and 130 attack aircraft. Pakistan, in contrast, fields 1,399 aircraft with 328 boasts 4,201 tanks and nearly 149,000 armored vehicles, dwarfing Pakistan's 2,627 tanks and 17,500 armored units. Pakistan does hold a lead in mobile rocket systems—600 compared to India's navy is a regional juggernaut with 293 vessels, including 2 aircraft carriers, 18 submarines, and 13 destroyers. Pakistan operates 121 vessels and lacks carriers or both nations continue to funnel billions into defence, a pressing question looms large: at what cost? In India, soaring defence budgets compete with urgent social needs—infrastructure, education, healthcare. In Pakistan, persistent economic instability and IMF bailouts already paint a grim picture of overextension. The trajectory for both nations seems clear -- military spending will continue to rise, although at different scales and speeds.
Yahoo
27-01-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Pepsi Just Made a $1.2 Billion Acquisition of Something That Has Nothing to Do With Carbonated Beverages
After 10 years in business, the Garza family sold their company Siete Foods to PepsiCo (NASDAQ: PEP) for a cool $1.2 billion. The deal for Siete was announced back in October but closed this January. Pepsi is an enormous business, and for it $1.2 billion is relatively small. But any purchase over $1 billion is still noteworthy. The surprising thing for some investors may be that Siete Foods doesn't have a single beverage in its product portfolio, let alone any carbonated beverages. Rather, the company makes food products that cater toward people looking for grain-free and dairy-free options in Mexican-American food. The acquisition of Siete Foods dovetails nicely with Pepsi's November acquisitions of Sabra and Obela. Pepsi had already owned half of both joint ventures but moved to acquire the rest, bringing more food products into Pepsi's portfolio. If it's surprising to you that Pepsi is acquiring food companies, then it's likely that you don't understand Pepsi's business. In fact, food products are one of the best reasons to invest in the company today. Over the last 12 months, Pepsi has generated revenue of over $90 billion. But a relatively small percentage of this is attributable to beverage sales in North America. In the company's fiscal third quarter of 2024 (which ended in early September), the North American beverage division only accounted for 31% of the business. Nearly as big as beverages, 28% of Pepsi's Q3 revenue came from snacks and food in North American markets. The company generates the remainder of its sales from food and beverages in international markets. However, snacks and food in North America are the more important parts of Pepsi's business, because they're more profitable by a mile. The company's North American Frito-Lay division alone accounted for 39% of its total Q3 operating profit; in comparison, just 24% of operating profit came from the North American beverage unit. To drill down further, Pepsi's Quaker Foods division in North America is small at just 3% of the company's overall revenue in Q3. But again, it commands better profits. Quaker Foods in North America had a Q3 operating margin of 15%, compared with just an 8% margin for beverages in North America. Given the size of Pepsi's non-beverage portfolio and looking at the margins, it's not surprising that the company is doubling down with acquisitions such as Sabra and Siete Foods. It's good business. When it comes to investing in Pepsi stock, it's important to have realistic expectations. Over the last 10 years, Pepsi has averaged only a 7% annual gain, according to Macrotrends. Returns were positive, which counts for something -- but they weren't anything to write home about. These pedestrian returns for Pepsi stock were due to its similarly pedestrian rate of revenue growth. Being one of the biggest businesses in the world already, and in a low-growth industry, means that it's hard to grow fast. And growth is important for stock returns. That said, PepsiCo stock isn't without its merits. For starters, the company's diverse and beloved product portfolio makes it one of the safest businesses in the world, so investors can reasonably expect stable profits. And because its stock price went down in 2023 and 2024, it's now cheaper than usual. Pepsi's price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 22 is below its 10-year average P/E valuation of 26. And with a dividend yield of over 3.5%, the income potential has never been higher; that's significant because Pepsi is an ultrareliable Dividend King. Finally, Pepsi has generated 39% of its revenue from international markets through the first three quarters of 2024. As a whole, revenue in international markets is growing while it's declining in North America. Moreover, profits are improving in international markets with scale. Based on these trends, it's possible that profit growth outpaces revenue growth for Pepsi in the coming years, which would provide the stock with an added boost. Pepsi is acquiring food companies because food is a big part of the business, and provides better-margin revenue than carbonated beverages. The company may not post impressive growth numbers due to its size. But management is focusing on its better opportunities, the stock is cheap, and international growth could provide a boost as profitability improves. All that said, PepsiCo shares aren't my best pick for outperforming the S&P 500 over the next three to five years. But investors could do a lot worse than Pepsi. And the stock does have merit from the perspectives of both safety and dividends, which could be important in making a decision. Ever feel like you missed the boat in buying the most successful stocks? Then you'll want to hear this. On rare occasions, our expert team of analysts issues a 'Double Down' stock recommendation for companies that they think are about to pop. If you're worried you've already missed your chance to invest, now is the best time to buy before it's too late. And the numbers speak for themselves: Nvidia: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2009, you'd have $369,816!* Apple: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2008, you'd have $42,191!* Netflix: if you invested $1,000 when we doubled down in 2004, you'd have $527,206!* Right now, we're issuing 'Double Down' alerts for three incredible companies, and there may not be another chance like this anytime soon.*Stock Advisor returns as of January 21, 2025 Jon Quast has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Pepsi Just Made a $1.2 Billion Acquisition of Something That Has Nothing to Do With Carbonated Beverages was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
