Investors already know that the company’s stores remain busy. What they want to learn is whether the warehouse retailer can translate its impressive sales growth into stronger profits while maintaining member loyalty.

Analysts currently expect the company to report quarterly earnings of approximately $6.55 per share. However, expectations may be a little too optimistic. Bank of America is reportedly looking for adjusted earnings of $6.52 per share, while analysts at Oppenheimer have also cautioned that the consensus estimate could be difficult to beat.

That sets up an interesting earnings report. Costco’s sales appear healthy, but the company may need more than another solid quarter to satisfy investors.

COST Has Already Reported Strong Sales

Unlike many retailers, Costco releases monthly sales updates. That means investors already have a reasonably good idea of how much merchandise moved through its warehouses during the quarter.

For the 16-week fiscal fourth quarter, Costco reported net sales of $93.9 billion, an increase of 11.3% from $84.4 billion a year earlier. Total comparable sales rose 9.4%.

Online growth was especially impressive. Digital comparable sales jumped nearly 20% during the quarter. That provides evidence that Costco is becoming more than a traditional warehouse chain. Its online operation is turning into an increasingly important growth engine.

Membership Growth Will Be Critical

Costco’s membership business is one of the most important parts of its financial model.

Membership fees provide a reliable stream of high-margin revenue, allowing Costco to keep merchandise prices low. That helps attract shoppers, strengthens customer loyalty and encourages members to renew their subscriptions.

Investors will also want to know whether more customers are upgrading to the higher-priced Executive membership. 

A slowdown in membership growth has become one of the market’s biggest concerns. COST stock is about 18% below its previous record despite the company’s strong sales performance. 

Margins Could Decide the Market’s Reaction

Strong revenue does not automatically translate into strong earnings. That is why Costco’s operating margins may determine how investors respond to the report.

The company must manage higher wages, transportation expenses and other operating costs while maintaining the low prices that members expect. Gasoline sales can also complicate the picture. Higher fuel prices may increase reported revenue, but gasoline generally carries lower margins than many products sold inside Costco’s warehouses.

Wall Street will want to see whether Kirkland Signature, the company’s private-label brand, is helping offset those pressures. Kirkland products can provide attractive value to customers while giving Costco greater control over pricing and profitability.

Investors should also listen to the earnings call for management’s comments about tariffs, inflation and product sourcing. The company has enough purchasing power to negotiate favorable terms with suppliers, but it is not immune to rising import or commodity costs.

Could COST Announce a Special Dividend?

Some analysts believe Costco may be preparing to announce another special dividend. The company last distributed a special dividend of $15 per share in January 2024. Based on COST’s current share price and its history of returning excess cash to shareholders, that could happen.

However, there is no guarantee that management will make such an announcement alongside earnings. Still, the company’s cash-generating ability makes the possibility worth watching. A large special dividend could soften the market’s reaction if earnings come in slightly below expectations.

What to Watch After Costco Reports Earnings

Costco heads into its earnings report with strong momentum. Quarterly net sales increased by double digits, comparable sales remained healthy and digital activity expanded rapidly.

However, Wall Street already expects that. The real questions are whether profit margins are holding up, membership growth can accelerate, and management can provide a confident outlook for the new fiscal year.

Consumers are also saving less. The personal saving rate fell to approximately 3% in July, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. That combination of high debt, expensive credit cards and limited savings can make smaller installment payments look especially attractive. 

One industry forecast estimated that the global BNPL market could grow from about $156.6 billion in 2023 to more than $1 trillion by 2028. For investors, there are two ways to approach this trend. They can buy a leading BNPL company such as Affirm Holdings, or they can spread their risk across several financial-technology businesses through an exchange-traded fund.

Affirm Holdings Remains the Top BNPL Trade

One of the top ways to trade the trend is with Affirm Holdings (NASDAQ: AFRM), which remains one of the most direct ways to trade the BNPL expansion. 

Just look at earnings growth for the reason why. Affirm recently delivered an impressive fiscal fourth quarter. Revenue increased 33% year over year to approximately $1.17 billion. Gross merchandise volume (GMV)—the total value of purchases made through Affirm—jumped 36% to $14.06 billion.

For the full fiscal year, GMV reached $50.17 billion, representing 37% growth. Management now expects fiscal 2027 GMV to exceed $64 billion. 

 Those numbers suggest that Affirm is doing more than simply riding a temporary consumer trend. The company is building a larger payment network involving shoppers, retailers and funding partners. As more merchants offer Affirm, the service becomes useful to more consumers. As more consumers use it, additional merchants have an incentive to join.

That network effect could become an important competitive advantage.

Affirm is also expanding internationally. Its partnership with Shopify is bringing Shop Pay Installments to Australia, giving the company another route into a potentially valuable market.

BPAY Offers a More Diversified Approach

Investors who like the fintech trend but do not want their results tied to one company could consider the iShares FinTech Active ETF (NYSEARCA: BPAY).

BPAY invests across the financial-technology ecosystem, including digital payments, banking, investment platforms, insurance technology and financial software. The fund held 36 positions as of September 16, 2026, and charged a net expense ratio of 0.55%. 

Diversification is the ETF’s main advantage. If one BNPL provider loses market share or suffers higher loan losses, stronger performance from another holding could help offset some of that weakness.

However, BPAY is not a pure BNPL fund. It also owns businesses operating in other areas of finance, which means it may not rise as quickly as Affirm during a powerful BNPL rally. It is also an actively managed, relatively small ETF with light trading volume. Investors should consider using limit orders to avoid paying more than expected.

Two Ways to Trade the Growing BNPL Opportunity

BNPL has the potential to remain one of the financial industry’s strongest long-term growth themes. Consumers appreciate payment flexibility, merchants want tools to increase sales, and fintech companies continue to integrate installment lending into larger digital payment platforms. Affirm offers a more concentrated opportunity, along with greater volatility and credit risk. BPAY provides broader exposure and reduces dependence on the performance of a single company.

Aggressive investors may prefer Affirm, while those seeking diversification may find BPAY more appropriate. Either way, the opportunity should be approached with discipline. A growing industry does not guarantee that every company—or every stock—will be a winner.

That is a pretty big move in the benchmark that sits underneath everything from mortgages to corporate bonds. Goldman Sachs says the pressure is coming from a nasty combination of swollen government borrowing, AI-related corporate debt issuance, resilient growth and the energy shock. Governments and companies funding AI infrastructure are increasingly reaching into the same pool of global savings. And that’s the part I’m watching. The bond selloff is changing the hurdle rate for growth.

The AI Boom Has Created A Second Borrower Competing With Governments

AI infrastructure has become one of the biggest capital-spending races on the planet, and now the companies building it are showing up in the debt market at the same time governments are issuing enormous amounts of paper.

Goldman estimates nearly $500 billion of AI-related debt issuance in 2026, with hyperscalers accounting for roughly 40% of that total. Oracle (NYSE: ORCL) gives us a clean look at what this means in practice. The company said it expected to spend roughly $70 billion on AI data centers in its current fiscal year and planned to raise another $40 billion through debt and equity. Oracle shares dropped 8.9% after investors got a look at the financing requirements. 

Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) and Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) are also spending at extraordinary rates on data centers and AI infrastructure, with the major hyperscalers collectively pushing hundreds of billions of dollars into capex. Reuters reported that the five biggest hyperscalers could see capital spending exceed free cash flow by 2027.  If the cost of financing rises, every one of those projects needs to clear a higher return hurdle. That is where the bond market starts showing up in the equity story.

Higher Yields Are Now Reaching The Real Economy

You don’t have to own a bond to feel the repricing.

Look at housing. The average U.S. 30-year fixed mortgage rate jumped 19 basis points in one week to 6.95%, its highest level since January 2025. 

That’s the transmission mechanism in plain English – Treasury yields move, mortgage financing gets more expensive, and suddenly the same house requires a much bigger monthly payment. This is why companies like D.R. Horton (NYSE: DHI) is getting caught in the crosshairs. The homebuilder doesn’t need a housing crash for higher yields to hurt. A buyer can simply get priced out, demand can slow, incentives can rise, and projects that looked attractive under cheaper financing can become harder to justify.

The same math applies to warehouses, factories, data centers and other capital-heavy projects. Prologis (NYSE: PLD) is a useful example because even a company with strong real estate demand still has to refinance and fund an enormous asset base. These examples help us understand that higher yields don’t need to blow up the economy before investors start caring about their portfolios’ health. They only need to make the marginal project less attractive, just as we have it now.

The Market Hasn’t Reached The Scary Part Yet

Now the difference between this setup and the traditional credit scare is that credit spreads haven’t blown out. And the market isn’t panicking yet.

Goldman says the biggest tech companies have issued more than $170 billion of debt this year, while credit spreads remain near historical highs and credit volatility sits near record lows. Investors are still focused heavily on the attractive all-in yield rather than treating these borrowers as imminent credit problems. That’s actually more useful to watch.

The bond market is repricing the cost of funding before it has repriced the quality of the borrowers. And JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM) is sitting right in the middle of that flow. Corporate borrowing, refinancing, underwriting and credit demand all run through the banking system, making JPM a useful name to watch as the cost of capital moves higher. The bank is also expanding its fixed-income footprint with a frontier-market local-currency bond index covering nearly $330 billion of debt across 26 countries. If companies can still borrow, the game continues. They just have to make the numbers work harder.

Watch The Cost Of Capital, Not Just The Yield

This is why I wouldn’t get hung up on whether the 10-year closes above or below 5% on any given day. The bigger signal is whether long-term yields stay elevated while the economy keeps demanding enormous amounts of capital.

I’m watching three things from here: the 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields, corporate credit spreads, and whether AI and infrastructure spending keep accelerating at a pace that can justify the financing bill.

If yields stay high but spreads remain tight, companies can keep borrowing. If yields stay high and spreads start widening, the financing squeeze gets much more serious. And if AI spending keeps climbing while free cash flow doesn’t keep pace, investors eventually have to put a higher price on the capital required to produce that growth.

That’s where the bond market can start rewriting the equity story, and by extension, millions of portfolios around the world.

Unfortunately, the earnings report seems more likely to support the bearish analyst sentiment. Several analysts believe the company may need more time.

Wall Street expects Nike’s revenue to decline year over year. Analysts are also bracing for weaker earnings as the company deals with softer demand, elevated costs and continued discounting.

That cautious outlook follows another challenging period for Nike. During its fiscal fourth quarter, overall revenue fell 1%, while sales in China dropped 17%. Adjusted earnings came in at 20 cents per share, beating the 13 cents analysts expected, but the better-than-expected profit was not enough to ease concerns about the company’s slow recovery. 

UBS analyst Jay Sole is among those taking a cautious view ahead of the October report. Sole recently warned that Nike’s global sales trends have deteriorated over the past three months. He believes earnings could fall short of consensus expectations and that management’s fiscal second-quarter outlook may be considerably weaker than Wall Street currently anticipates.

China Remains a Major Problem

China will be one of the most closely watched parts of the report. The region accounts for roughly 15% of Nike’s annual revenue, making it the company’s third-largest market behind North America and Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Unfortunately, Nike continues to lose momentum there.

The company has struggled with weak product assortments, excessive inventory and growing competition from domestic brands such as Anta Sports and Li Ning. Chinese consumers are also becoming more selective with discretionary purchases. Management previously indicated that China’s revenue trends could remain broadly consistent with the steep declines reported last quarter as Nike and its retail partners work through excess inventory.

Investors will be looking for any sign that the decline is stabilizing. Even a smaller-than-expected drop could be viewed as progress. Another sharp deterioration, however, could raise new questions about whether Nike can regain its former strength in this important market.

Wholesale Growth Could Be a Bright Spot

One encouraging part of Nike’s recovery has been its renewed relationship with wholesale partners. Under its previous strategy, the company pulled merchandise from several retailers to sell more products directly through its own stores and websites. That decision gave competing brands more room on store shelves.

CEO Elliott Hill is now reversing much of that approach. Nike has been rebuilding relationships with retailers and restoring products to important sales channels.

Guidance Could Decide NKE’s Next Move

Nike could beat the quarter’s reduced expectations and still disappoint investors if its outlook is weak. That is why management’s forecast for the fiscal second quarter may have a greater effect on the stock than the reported earnings figure. 

Wall Street will be listening for information about holiday demand, China, inventories, tariffs and the pace of new product launches. Investors should also watch management’s tone. CEO Elliott Hill has already acknowledged that Nike’s progress has been uneven and that the company is not yet performing at its full potential.

The October 1 report does not need to show a completed turnaround. That would be unrealistic. But investors do need to see credible signs that sales are stabilizing, product innovation is improving, and margin pressure is becoming manageable.

With expectations already low, even modest progress could produce a relief rally. But if Nike reports weaker earnings and issues another disappointing forecast, its stock could remain under pressure. For now, Wall Street is giving Nike very little benefit of the doubt. The October earnings report is the company’s next opportunity to show that it’s finally beginning to move forward again.

Even with those datapoints, it’s impossible to ignore the overall contradiction in the technical domain.

Just pull up a standard price chart for Intuitive Machines stock. On a year-to-date basis, the ticker is down 14.54%, which initially might not sound too bad for such a speculative name. But look at the six-month trailing loss, which comes out to almost 27% in the red. Then look at the trailing month, which has succumbed nearly 32% below parity.

Conventional wisdom says to run far away from LUNR stock. While there might be a discount on the premise of mean reversion, unless this argument is demonstrated, it frankly appears like wishful thinking. Nevertheless, for those who want to take a capped-risk, capped-reward shot at LUNR, a vertical options spread expiring Oct. 23 could be interesting.

How so? There could be an unusual mispricing event.

Identifying the Opportunity in LUNR Stock (and the Risk)

What really caught my attention was the 14/15.50 bull call spread expiring Oct. 23, which is roughly six weeks out from the time of writing (Sep. 16). For a net debit (cash outlay) of $71, a speculator will be hoping for Intuitive Machines stock to trigger the $15.50 second-leg strike price at expiration. If so, the maximum profit would clock in at $79, a payout of over 111%.

From a nominal risk management perspective, I appreciate that I can slowly stagger my exposure. A few turns at $71 a pop isn’t the greatest expenditure in the world. Further, the way the spread is structured, the most that can be lost is the net debit paid per spread.

But beyond the surface-level risk that LUNR stock is historically a volatile entity is the actual probabilistic risk. Wall Street assigns a probability of breakeven at the $14.71 price point of only 41.2%. Worse yet, OptionCharts.io’s Probability Distribution screener indicates that the odds of LUNR triggering the $15.50 second-leg strike at expiration sit at only 30.62%.

You don’t have to run a formal expected value calculation to immediately see the dilemma facing debit-side options traders. At these probabilities, your portfolio would quickly sink as the number of losses (both full and partial) outpaces the number of wins.

In any other circumstance, financial experts would likely recommend you avoid this idea altogether. But this seemingly pessimistic conclusion is also where the opportunity rests for LUNR stock — and that’s because you don’t have to automatically accept the underlying presupposition.

It’s All Presuppositional, and That’s the Point for Forecasting Intuitive Machines Stock

While some entities in the financial publication space may believe that their indicators represent the gospel truth of the markets, nothing could be further from the actual truth. In reality, any argument made about the unknown future requires a presupposition to move the discussion forward.

And that’s the undeserved mythology of Wall Street’s probability distributions. Yeah, they may look “scientific” because you’re seeing bell curves and standard deviations. But cutting through all the nonsense, any forward-looking model is a presupposition.

Getting back to the aforementioned probabilities — 41.2% to break even, 30.62% to full profitability — these are derived from the Black-Scholes family of calculations. They’re useful because the calculations integrate implied volatility (IV), which itself derives from actual orders. However, the output of the formula presupposes that the target security will undergo a random walk between now and the expiration date.

If such a random walk occurred, then yes, those probabilities would accurately reflect reality. But it’s this presupposition that should be challenged. Because by necessity of the underlying math of Black-Scholes, the future is treated as an independent variable relative to the past.

None of us (to my knowledge) actually believes this. Fundamental analysts believe that past financial disclosures embed potential information about future trends. Technical analysts believe that past price patterns embed probabilities of future breakouts (or breakdowns). Quantitative analysts believe that conditioned trends found in past empirical data can create a composite picture of what may materialize tomorrow.

What’s the common thread? There’s a presupposition that the future is dependent on the past.

If that were the case — and I believe the data backs this up — it doesn’t make too much sense to rely on a random-walk model to help decipher LUNR stock. Let’s also keep in mind that Intuitive Machines has a 60-month beta of 1.85. Thus, it’s significantly more volatile than the benchmark S&P 500.

Combined, these factors would suggest that the future will not be random but would instead depend on past material events.

Filtering for the Identified Signal

So, from a quantitative perspective, what would be the material event that occurred that may influence the near-term future of Intuitive Machines stock? I would argue that its distinctively bearish order flow balance over the last 10 weeks — where LUNR has only managed to print three up weeks — represents a key signal.

During this time, the overall slope was downward. By discretizing price action as hard, binary categories, we can come up with a 3-7-D state classification, enabling us to look back in time to tabulate how many occurrences of this signal have materialized. As it turns out, there have been 20 occurrences (on a rolling basis) since the public market debut of LUNR stock.

Of this figure, the ticker has exceeded the equivalent of the $15.50 strike on week 6 (coinciding with the Oct. 23 expiration date) 14 times. Granted, the sample size is extremely small, leading to potential distortions. Still, as a simple statistic in the observed period, LUNR stock is currently running a projected 70% hit ratio for the 14/15.50 bull spread.

If that is indeed the case — and of course it’s a massive “if” due to the sample-size problem — there may be a serious mispricing of Intuitive Machines stock call spreads. Even if the exact projected probabilities are disputed, the observed reality is that this ticker historically enjoys a buy-the-dip rally following an extended downturn.

The major caveat is that an inductive inference cannot guarantee that prior trends will materialize as expected in the future. Still, if you have some “silly” money lying around, LUNR stock might not be a bad candidate to consider.

Finally, for a detailed, visual look at the process that undergirds my Markov chain analysis, you may watch my YouTube videos.

For perspective, the $91 price target is in line with the consensus price target nearly to the penny ($91.08), That would give investors an upside of around 15% to go along with a dividend that yields 1.79% as of the market close on Sept. 17. 

However, BUD stock is up more than 22% in 2026. So, having a leading analyst forecast further growth for Anheuser-Busch may get investors off the sidelines.  

Before you decide whether to invest in the company with the iconic brand known as The King of Beers, it’s important to understand both sides of the alcoholic beverage market. The threats are real, but so are the opportunities. 

America is Becoming a Drier Country 

A data point that was hard to ignore in the last several rounds of corporate earnings was bearish for alcohol stocks. American consumers are drinking less. Not just a little less…a lot.  

The numbers back that up. In Anheuser-Busch’s own Q2 2026 earnings report, released July 30, U.S. volumes fell 0.7% even as the industry’s top brands, Michelob Ultra and Busch Light among them, continued to gain share. The company only grew U.S. revenue at all (up 2.6%) because it pushed pricing and mix harder, not because more people were buying beer. 

That’s particularly true of the coveted Gen-Z demographic. They’re on the wellness train and opting for social activities that don’t revolve around alcohol.  

Two or three quarters may still be an anomaly, but it doesn’t feel like it. There’s something going on, and it’s not likely to change soon.  

America Isn’t Where Anheuser-Busch Makes Its Money 

Here’s the piece of the puzzle Deutsche Bank analyst Mitch Collett is leaning on. Anheuser-Busch barely looks like an American beer stock once you check where the growth is actually coming from.  

According to the company’s own 2Q26 segment breakdown, Middle Americas (Mexico, Colombia, and the rest of the region) accounted for 41% of EBITDA and grew organic EBITDA 10.3%. South America added another 18% of EBITDA, up 14.3%. Combined, those two emerging-market zones represent nearly 60% of the company’s profit base, and both are compounding at double-digit rates. 

Contrast that with North America, which contributed 20% of EBITDA but grew organic EBITDA by just 0.5%, and Asia Pacific, where EBITDA fell 10.9% on a 4.7% volume decline in China. The pattern is consistent: developed markets are flat to shrinking, and developing markets are carrying the company. 

That split matters because the “Americans are drinking less” narrative, however real, is a developed-market story. A 2025 Gallup poll found that just 54% of U.S. adults drink alcohol at all, the lowest reading in 90 years. Collett’s argument is that Anheuser-Busch’s dominant share across its core emerging markets acts as a kind of structural insulation. Mexico alone posted 9.8% revenue growth and 50.3% EBITDA margins in the quarter, the kind of numbers no developed beer market comes close to matching right now. 

Collett called Anheuser-Busch one of the most emerging-markets-focused names in European staples. That’s a notable distinction in a sector where most large beverage names still draw the bulk of their profit from slowing developed economies. 

On the domestic side, Collett points to Beyond Beer, Anheuser-Busch’s lineup of cocktails and sparkling beverages, as a second growth lever. It’s not a small bet anymore: Beyond Beer revenue grew 44% company-wide in the quarter, led in the U.S. by Cutwater, which the company says was the #1 share-gaining brand in the entire spirits industry.  

No-alcohol beer, led by Michelob Ultra Zero, grew revenue more than 100% and continues to outpace the broader no-alcohol category. Those are the two categories built for a consumer who wants something in hand at a social occasion, just not necessarily a Bud Light. 

Wall Street, broadly, agrees with the upgrade. Of the 12 analysts covering the stock, 11 rate it Buy or Strong Buy, with just one Hold remaining. That’s about as close to consensus as a sell-side call gets. 

BUD Stands Out Among Its Peers 

Another way to understand the Deutsche Bank rating is to look at the performance of BUD relative to peers such as Molson Coors (NYSE: TAP) and The Boston Beer Co. (NYSE: SAM). 

BUD stock is up 22.9% year-to-date as of the market close on Sept. 17. By contrast, TAP stock is down 16.4%, and SAM stock is down 11.3%. Both stocks are down over the last 12 months, in contrast to BUD, which is up 33.9% over the same period.  

In this case, there may be a story behind that move. Investors may remember that Anheuser-Busch was identified as part of a boycott after it aired a social media promotion featuring transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney. BUD stock fell sharply, which at the time was seen as overdone.  

The point is, some of this gain may be a catch-up trade. But it’s unlikely to believe that it explains all of it.  

The Balance Sheet Backs Up the Growth Story 

One more thing worth noting: this isn’t growth funded by leverage. Anheuser-Busch’s net leverage ratio fell to 2.86x as of June 2026, down from 3.27x a year earlier and more than a full turn better than four years ago.  

Free cash flow jumped $2.5 billion year-over-year to $3.9 billion for the first half of 2026, and underlying earnings per share grew 23.4% in the quarter. A brewer with improving cash generation and a shrinking debt load has more room to keep investing in Beyond Beer and emerging-market share gains, even if U.S. volumes stay soft. 

Why This Upgrade Should Matter to Your Portfolio 

None of this erases the real headwinds facing the alcohol sector. Gen Z’s retreat from drinking is a genuine structural shift, not a temporary blip, and it will keep showing up in developed-market volume numbers for years, as Anheuser-Busch’s own U.S. results just confirmed.  

But Deutsche Bank’s upgrade is a reminder that a stock’s exposure to a bearish narrative isn’t the same as its exposure to the underlying numbers. With nearly 60% of profit coming from emerging markets growing double digits, and a balance sheet in its best shape in years, the gap between perception and fundamentals may be the whole investment case for BUD. 

After all, retirement expenses do not stop when the stock market becomes volatile. That is why many investors use exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, to create a diversified stream of investment income. ETFs can make it easier to own dozens, or even hundreds, of securities through a single investment. They can also help investors combine current income with the potential for long-term capital appreciation.

However, not every income fund works the same way. Some prioritize immediate cash distributions, while others focus on traditional dividends or long-term dividend growth. The following three ETFs offer distinctly different approaches.

How JEPQ Generates Its High Monthly Income

For investors seeking substantial monthly income, the JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF (NASDAQ: JEPQ) remains one of the most compelling options.

JEPQ invests primarily in large-cap growth companies while using an options-based strategy to generate additional income. In simple terms, the fund owns a portfolio with significant exposure to Nasdaq-related technology and growth stocks. It then collects option premiums through equity-linked notes tied to a covered-call strategy. Those premiums, along with dividends received from the underlying stocks, help support JEPQ’s monthly distributions.

As of September 2026, JPMorgan reported that JEPQ had delivered a 12-month rolling dividend yield of approximately 10.69% and a 30-day SEC yield of 12.87%. The fund carries an expense ratio of 0.35%. 

VYMI: An Income ETF With International Diversification

The Vanguard International High Dividend Yield ETF (NASDAQ: VYMI) tracks the FTSE All-World ex US High Dividend Yield Index. It invests in dividend-paying companies located outside the United States, including businesses in developed and emerging markets.

Its portfolio provides exposure to sectors such as financial services, energy, healthcare, consumer products, industrials, and telecommunications. Holdings may include recognizable international companies such as HSBC (NYSE: HSBC), Novartis (NYSE: NVS), Roche (OTC: RHHBY), Nestlé (OTC: NSRGY), and Royal Bank of Canada (NYSE: RY).

One important update for 2026 is that Vanguard reduced VYMI’s expense ratio from 0.17% to 0.07%. That means an investor pays approximately $7 in annual fund expenses for every $10,000 invested. Its dividend yield was recently around 3.5%.

VYMI offers more than income. It can help reduce an investor’s dependence on the U.S. economy, the U.S. dollar and a small group of highly valued American technology companies.

VIG Prioritizes Dividend Growth Over High Current Yield

The Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (NYSEARCA: VIG) is another one to consider.

VIG tracks the S&P U.S. Dividend Growers Index, which focuses on established American companies with a history of consistently increasing their dividends. Instead of simply buying the stocks with the highest current yields, the strategy emphasizes companies that have demonstrated the financial strength to raise their payouts over time.

Its portfolio includes major companies from technology, healthcare, financial services, consumer products, energy and other important areas of the economy. Large holdings have included companies such as Broadcom (NASDAQ: AVGO), Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), Apple (NASDAQ: AAPL), JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM), Visa (NYSE: V), Eli Lilly (NYSE: LLY), and Exxon Mobil (NYSE: XOM). VIG’s expense ratio has also been reduced and now stands at just 0.04%, or about $4 per year for every $10,000 invested.  

Three Income ETFs, Three Different Strategies

These three ETFs solve different portfolio problems for investors looking for income.

One, JEPQ offers the highest immediate income and monthly distributions. Two, VYMI combines dividend income with international diversification. And third, VIG provides a lower starting yield but emphasizes quality, dividend growth, and long-term appreciation. For many investors, the best answer may not be choosing only one. A carefully balanced combination could provide monthly option income, international exposure, and long-term dividend growth. 

That’s where this starts getting dicey for the food economy. The numbers coming out of the fields are already moving, but the price Americans pay for the finished product hasn’t caught up yet. There is a whole lot of economics sitting between those two points, and some of it is already showing signs that the diesel shock is going to travel a lot further than the gas tank. 

The Diesel Shock Has Already Reached The Farm

Diesel doesn’t stop at the gas station. It runs tractors, combines, trucks and the freight network moving crops from farms to processors, distributors and stores. Wells Fargo Investment Institute’s latest data shows diesel up 57% year to date through August 31, while wheat jumped 47%, soybean oil 47%, soybeans 24%, corn 16% and fertilizer 13%. Those are market prices moving through the agricultural complex, but not yet being seen on the grocery shelf. 

CME Group’s August agriculture index rose 6.37% in one month and 16.16% year to date, with Chicago wheat up 17.91% and corn 15.82% in August alone. CME also says diesel in major U.S. commodity-growing regions has surged more than 40% since the war began, squeezing farm margins alongside fertilizer costs. 

This is where the chain gets ugly for farmers: they cannot just switch off fuel or fertilizer when prices explode, since those inputs determine whether the crop gets planted, harvested and transported in the first place. Corteva’s management has already discussed fertilizer prices influencing the economics of corn versus soybeans and keeping Safrinha corn acreage flat rather than expanding it. 

Fertilizer Could Turn An Oil Problem Into A Food Problem

CF Industries (NYSE: CF) is already showing what happens upstream when the squeeze reaches nitrogen. In the first half of 2026, CF’s average UAN selling price jumped to $391 per product ton from $286 a year earlier, while adjusted gross margin per ton climbed to $234 from $148. 

That is a huge clue for the food thesis because fertilizer is an input into the crop, not the final product. If farmers face higher fertilizer and diesel bills, they need stronger crop economics to justify planting decisions. If commodity prices rise enough to compensate, that cost gets embedded further down the chain. If they do not, acreage, yields or farm profitability take the hit.

The Grocery Store Is The Last Place You’ll See It

After the farm comes the processor, food manufacturer, distributor and retailer. Companies such as Tyson Foods (NYSE: TSN) are already dealing with commodity pressure; Tyson said its prepared-foods business had experienced commodity inflation in seven of the previous eight quarters, while beef supplies remained tight. That is, before another full wave of energy and transportation costs works through the system.

Then you get to retailers like Walmart (NYSE: WMT), which is the clearest example of how fuel can hit margins before consumers see the full impact: rising fuel costs reduced its first-quarter operating income by about $175 million, largely through delivery and fulfillment costs, and Walmart’s CFO warned that persistently elevated costs could produce higher retail price inflation later in 2026. 

Restaurants have an even tighter squeeze because they sit at the end of several cost pipelines simultaneously. McDonald’s (NYSE: MCD), Domino’s Pizza (NYSE: DPZ) and other chains have to manage food ingredients, distribution, packaging, labor and delivery economics while customers are already pushing back against higher menu prices. The August CPI data shows food away from home running at 3.4% year over year, faster than food at home’s 2.2%, with full-service meals up 3.5%. 

Someone Has To Eat The Bill

That is the part I think investors are missing when they look at today’s grocery inflation and conclude the food shock is contained. The consumer price data tells us what has already made it through the pipeline. Commodity markets are showing what is moving through the pipeline now.

There are several places where that bill can land. Farmers can absorb higher input costs. Processors can accept narrower margins. Restaurants can raise menu prices and risk losing traffic. Retailers can protect shoppers and sacrifice margin. Or companies with enough pricing power can push costs downstream.

That creates very different setups across the food economy. CF Industries can benefit from stronger fertilizer pricing. Corteva has to manage the farmers’ economics. Tyson Foods faces expensive cattle and commodity inputs. Walmart has to defend low prices while absorbing distribution costs. Restaurants such as McDonald’s have to balance menu pricing against traffic.

What I’m Watching

That’s why I’m not looking at this as a simple food-inflation trade. The bigger setup is what happens when an energy shock collides with an agricultural system already carrying higher input costs, and then works its way through businesses with very different amounts of room to absorb it.

For the next few quarters, I’d be watching gross margins, pricing actions and management guidance across the food chain more closely than the headline food CPI. If those margins start to deteriorate as companies push through higher prices, we’ll have a much clearer read on who is actually paying for this oil shock. 

.

That sounds like a tech story, but it is becoming a Copart, Inc. (NASDAQ: CPRT) story: the more expensive cars become to repair, the easier it becomes for insurers to total them. That’s exactly what I’m seeing in the latest numbers. Copart sold 2.9% fewer vehicles globally, yet revenue still climbed 2.4% to $1.15 billion, global average selling prices increased 3.5%, and revenue per unit jumped 5.4%.

So don’t just look at the unit decline this quarter and write CPRT off as a volume story. There’s something else happening underneath it.

Expensive Cars Are Changing The Math Of A Total Loss

Copart’s business is tied to wrecks, but the number that really drives its inventory is the point at which an insurer decides that repairing a wreck no longer makes economic sense. That threshold is shifting.

Collision claim frequency fell 3.4% year over year, helping drive a 7.5% decline in U.S. insurance units. But total-loss frequency reached 23.3% in Q2 2026, the highest second-quarter level in Copart’s history, up from 22.4% a year earlier. Average collision severity jumped nearly 8.8% to more than $6,300, its fourth straight quarter of acceleration, while repair costs are more than 50% above 2019 levels, according to CCC data cited by management.

However, even with fewer accidents, there can still be a healthy salvage pool if the accidents that do happen become expensive enough to total more vehicles.

When those vehicles hit the auction block, Copart is getting more money out of them. U.S. insurance ASP rose 3.7% in Q4, U.S. non-insurance ASP 5.9%, bank and finance seller ASPs 12.4% year to date, and Copart Direct ASP 29.2%. Yeah, volume is softer, but value per vehicle is doing the heavy lifting here.

Buyer Network Is Becoming More Valuable Than Its Vehicle Count

This is where the tape can fool you if you only watch unit growth. Copart isn’t a manufacturer that needs to produce more inventory. It runs a marketplace where buyer depth changes the economics of the inventory already sitting there.

International buyers accounted for 38.2% of U.S. units sold in fiscal 2026, but 45.7% of the dollars spent. They’re punching above their weight. International units grew 10% in Q4, international insurance units increased 11.2%, U.S. dealer units climbed 5.8%, and BluCar, serving bank, rental and fleet partners, grew nearly 20%.

So I’m not looking at a business that needs accident frequency to bounce. Copart is broadening supply and demand, then using that liquidity to squeeze more value out of every vehicle moving through the platform.

Then Copart Bought The Cars That Never Become Salvage

This is where the $1.9 billion acquisition of ACV Auctions Inc. (NYSE: ACVA) makes a lot more sense.

Copart agreed to buy ACV Auctions for $10.50 per share in cash, valuing the deal at about $1.9 billion. ACV processed roughly $10 billion of gross merchandise value in 2025, with more than 22,000 active buyers.

Its traditional business gets involved after an insurer decides a vehicle is economically totaled. ACV gives Copart exposure to vehicles that are still perfectly usable but moving through the wholesale market.

Management says the combination creates a broader remarketing platform spanning dealer trade-ins, wholesale, salvage and international resale, backed by Copart’s physical footprint and buyer network.

That’s bigger than waiting for insurance claims to recover since Copart is trying to capture more of a vehicle’s life before it reaches the salvage yard.

The Market Still Has A Problem With The Bill

I’d pump the brakes on the bull case here. Copart is spending heavily to build the next version of the company. Fourth-quarter gross profit fell 5.5% to $481.4 million even as revenue rose 2.4%, while operating income dropped 10.6% to $368.9 million and EPS fell 14.6% to $0.35.

Operating expense per car increased by 12.7%, partly due to investments in long-haul delivery, Title Express, technology and wholesale facilities. That’s the bet: spending comes before the payoff. The ACV deal is expected to be neutral to EPS in the first full year and accretive in fiscal 2028 and beyond.

If ACV, international growth, higher-value salvage and buyer liquidity push enough vehicles through the network, today’s margin pressure can look like investment spending in hindsight. If not, the margin compression gets harder to ignore.

The chart gives us a clean level to watch. CPRT is around $30.82, near its 50-day SMA at $30.38, but below the 20-day and 200-day averages of around $34.5.

So $30 is the first line in the sand. Reclaim $34–35, and the chart starts confirming the fundamental story.

Where I Want Copart Next

I like what Copart is building, but I’m not buying because CPRT has pulled back. Rising repair costs are a tailwind, while the buyer network extracts more value per vehicle. ACV Auctions Inc. adds exposure to vehicles that never become salvage.

But the market still needs to see spending translate into earnings, and the chart is sitting on support rather than breaking higher. I’ll take the trade when CPRT takes back $34–35. Until then, I’m watching whether repair costs turn into earnings.

Owning individual dividend-paying stocks can be a successful strategy for buy-and-hold investors who reinvest their dividends. The compounding effect can significantly increase an investor’s total return over time.

However, investing in single stocks comes with a couple of risks. One of those comes from a change to a dividend payout. Ideally, investors want to own stocks of companies that are increasing their dividends. At the very least, they want the assurance that the dividend won’t be suspended or cut.

The latter was the case with AT&T (NYSE: T) when it cut its dividend from $2.04 to $1.11 in 2022. The company’s strategy has proven to be correct. But for income investors, it was an alarming event.

That’s because many investors rely on a company’s dividends for regular income. And a payout cut of nearly 50% has a real impact.

Another option is to invest in dividend ETFs. These funds buy a basket of dividend-paying companies, removing the single stock risk while still providing a source of regular income.

Here are four dividend ETFs investors may want to consider.

Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF

The Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF (NYSEARCA: DIVO) offers investors a combination of dividend stocks and covered-call income.

DIVO owns a relatively concentrated portfolio of established, large-cap U.S. companies with histories of earnings and dividend growth. The fund’s managers then selectively sell covered calls on individual holdings to generate additional income.

A covered call involves selling call options against stocks the fund already owns. The premiums collected from those options can support the ETF’s monthly distributions. The tradeoff is that the strategy may limit some of the fund’s upside when one of its stocks rallies sharply.

As of August, DIVO had a 4.84% distribution rate and a 1.35% yield. Its total expense ratio was 0.56%. DIVO may appeal to investors who want monthly cash flow but still want exposure to high-quality blue-chip companies.

JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF

The JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF (NASDAQ: JEPQ) is another interesting ETF.

JEPQ invests in large-cap companies associated with the Nasdaq-100 while using options to generate income. That gives investors exposure to many of the market’s leading growth businesses, along with monthly distributions supported by stock dividends and options premiums. As of June, JEPQ had a 12-month rolling dividend yield of 10.69% and a 30-day SEC yield of 12.87%. Its expense ratio was 0.35%. 

JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF

The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF (NYSEARCA: JEPI) is also interesting. 

JEPI owns a diversified portfolio of large-cap U.S. companies while using an options strategy to produce monthly income. Recent holdings have included Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN), Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT), Alphabet (NASDAQ: GOOGL), Mastercard (NYSE: MA), NVIDIA (NASDAQ: NVDA), Johnson & Johnson (NYSE: JNJ), AbbVie (NYSE: ABBV) and Trane Technologies (NYSE: TT).

JEPI spreads its exposure across more areas of the economy. 

That may make it more attractive to investors looking for income with less dependence on the technology sector. As of July, JEPI’s dividend yield was 8.05%, while its yield was 7.88%. The fund carried an expense ratio of 0.35%.   

iShares Core High Dividend ETF

Investors who prefer a simpler dividend strategy can also consider the iShares Core High Dividend ETF (NYSEARCA: HDV). Rather than relying on options trading to help it generate income along the way for ETF holders, HDV tracks an index of high-yielding U.S. stocks. The portfolio has substantial exposure to healthcare, consumer staples and energy—sectors that can sometimes hold up better than speculative growth stocks during uncertain markets.

As of August, HDV had a 3.34% yield. Its expense ratio was just 0.08%, making it the least expensive fund on this list. HDV may not deliver the eye-catching yields of JEPQ or JEPI, but it offers a low-cost way to own established dividend-paying companies.

Which Income Strategy Fits Your Portfolio?

Each of these ETFs approaches income differently. DIVO blends dividend growth with selective covered calls. JEPQ offers higher income and more technology exposure. JEPI provides a broader, more defensive equity portfolio, while HDV offers a traditional high-dividend strategy at a very low cost. As we said above, when the stock market becomes volatile, as it is now, investors often look for ways to make their portfolios a little more defensive. 

Dividend-paying investments can help because they provide income even when share prices are moving sideways or lower. Consider these four income ETFs moving forward to help diversify and safeguard your portfolio from the chaos.