The New Fed: What Kevin Warsh Means for Your Money

In this episode, Wade Lopez and Gary Aiken analyze the implications of Kevin Warsh's appointment as Fed Chair, exploring how his background and policy approach could influence markets, interest rates, and financial planning amidst current economic challenges.

Transcript

Announcer 0:00

Views expressed are solely those of the speakers and do not represent this show or its team.

SPEAKER_02 0:05

I think investors need to avoid jumping to conclusions about Kevin Warsh based upon their uh their political bent. Um and uh and and boy, I I hope that the president of the United States also avoids that uh jumping to conclusions if Warsh doesn't do exactly what he wants him to do.

SPEAKER_00 0:29

Welcome to Build to Last Conversations about Wealth, Work, and Life. I'm Wade Lopez, and I'm joined by our chief investment officer, Gary Aiken. Something significant happened at the Federal Reserve last month. Kevin Warsh was sworn in as the new chair. He succeeded Jerung Powell, who had led the central bank for eight years. And for most people, the reaction to that news was probably somewhere between okay and what does that actually mean for me? That is exactly what we're going to answer today. Who is Kevin Walsh? How did he end up in the sea? And what is this signaling about where monetary policy is headed? And what does any of it mean for investors, business owners, and families who are trying to plan and build something that lasts? Gary, welcome. Let's start with this question. The one that matters most now. Does a new fetch here actually change anything for the average investor in big side? Or is it mostly noise?

SPEAKER_02 1:28

Well, I would say that this chairman is different than the previous chairman and maybe the previous two or three chairmen. And so it does matter. Um it it but it doesn't necessarily matter in the long-term direction of interest rates. Um, but it but it does matter in the tone of the Federal Reserve, that the tone that they set for markets.

SPEAKER_00 1:56

So before we talk about what Wars is going to do, I want people to understand who he actually is, because his background is generally different from what people expect normally from a bed chair. He's not an economist, he's a lawyer and a financier. Stanford undergrad, Harvard Law, years at Morgan Stanley and Murders and Acquisitions. Then he went to work in the Bush White House. So before serving on the Fed's board of governors between 2006 and something like 2011. So, Gary, why does his background actually matter? And what does a Wall Street and White House background bring to the Fed that a traditional academic economist might not?

SPEAKER_02 2:38

Wade, the Fed, whether we like it or not, is in the business of politics at this point in time. And so having somebody who isn't just an economist, doesn't just understand the nuts and bolts of monetary policy, but can also navigate the politics of the White House and the politics of Congress uh efficiently, is very important. Um, and so I think that his background, uh, while not an academic economist, um, but his background is going to give him the tools necessary to navigate these sort of dicey political waters.

SPEAKER_00 3:18

Right. And he he was in the room during the 2008 financial crisis. Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, AIG. How does that experience shape how someone thinks about monetary policy and financial stability?

SPEAKER_02 3:32

Well, I think it demonstrates that he has seen maybe the worst of what happens when our financial system gets out of control and what tools are available uh at the at the uh in the toolbox of the Federal Reserve, and also what maybe the consequences are, short-term and long-term, of using those tools. And so that experience is going to be important if we get into trouble, but also guiding us to ensure we, you know, maybe we don't get into trouble.

SPEAKER_00 4:03

Right. You know, after you left the Fed in 2011, he spent some years at the Hoover Institution and Stanford Business School becoming an increasingly vocal critic of quantitative easing and what he viewed as the Fed overreaching its mandate. What was his core argument in your estimation? And does it hold up?

SPEAKER_02 4:28

Yeah, in the wake of the financial crisis of 2007-2009, um, the Federal Reserve introduced new tools in its toolkit that it had never used before. And a lot of these new tools were untested, and uh and they continued long after the crisis had abated. And I think the crux of his argument against quote-unquote quantitative easing, which is when the Fed goes out and buys longer-term bonds, buys mortgage bonds, buys other assets that it traditionally wouldn't own in order to pump more cash into the economy, was that the markets became addicted to this support, that every time the stock market went down, every time there was some little hiccup, the markets depended upon the Fed to come in and save the day. Um, it also leaves politicians off the hook, right? This is the job of Congress to make laws to affect economic policy for the United States. And when the Federal Reserve is doing their job for them or ameliorating the negatives uh that come out of uh you know policy that's demonstrated or that's uh erected from our elected leaders, um, it is taking power away from Congress uh that it that it shouldn't be doing. Um and then, you know, when interest rates are too low for too long, you know, capital gets misallocated. People do things they wouldn't normally do if interest rates were at a normal level. Um and then, you know, of course, when you have all this money sloshing around, it plants the seeds for future inflation. And so those are the reasons I think uh, you know, Kevin Walsh is is uh you know uh an opponent of quantitative easing, and his policy at the Fed will likely be to return the Fed to a more normal policy stance.

SPEAKER_00 6:32

Well, you know, he's being described as an inflation hawk, but he was also publicly sympathetic to rate cuts as recently as last year. How do you uh reconcile those two positions and which one is the real Kevin Walsh?

SPEAKER_02 6:47

You know, um I think the real Kevin Walsh is the hawk. Um and like we said, he's not just an economist, he also understands the politics. And so if you wanted to be Fed chair, you had to promise uh or come up with a uh uh a construct in which there was the possibility to lower interest rates to be nominated to be Fed chair or to be nominated to be on the board during the Trump presidency. And uh and so I think um while none of the economic arguments were wrong per se, I don't know that Kevin Walsh believes in them in his heart of hearts. Uh and uh and so I think Kevin Walsh the hawk is what we should expect, especially uh given the first statement out of the Federal Reserve that price stability is going to be their number one objective.

SPEAKER_00 7:46

Yeah, and I agree you most people think you know that why he was nominated by Trump, clear expectation, all right. But now he's facing an inflation environment that makes cuts pretty difficult. How does someone navigate that kind of political pressure while maintaining any sense of credibility?

SPEAKER_02 8:06

I think that's that's a key item. And I think one of the ways that they can navigate that is by talking less. I think that's another one of Kevin Warsh's criticisms of the Fed.

SPEAKER_00 8:19

Great coin.

SPEAKER_02 8:19

That uh that in addition to quantitative easing, they also introduced this idea of forward guidance, where there would be Fed speakers, Board of Governors members, presidents of Federal Reserve banks would go out and talk about what was going on behind the scenes of the Fed, how they were thinking about things, and guiding the market to to uh to where they wanted markets to go. And uh and that that has problems because another listener isn't just the markets, it's also Congress and the president of the United States. And so talking less is going to be one way to take some of the pressure off.

SPEAKER_00 9:00

Let's talk about what he's actually walked into because the time of year is it's pretty challenging. You know, Warsh was sworn in on May 22nd. His first policy meeting was June 16th, 17th. He's leading the Fed at one of the more complicated moments of monetary policy to recent memory. Inflation's re-accelerated 4.2% analyzed as it may, the highest interest in more than three years, driven significantly by energy prices tied to the conflict in the Middle East. So, Gary, how does a new Fed chair establish credibility when he's walking into an inflation policy?

SPEAKER_02 9:36

I think the the way that Kevin Warsh has chosen to deal with that is to reduce the size of the statement from six or seven paragraphs down to five very short terse ones, and to introduce a single line, which is that price stability is the Fed's number one objective. And so this idea that, hey, inflation is high and we want to be able to lower interest rates in the future, uh, the way that we do that is by projecting a hawkishness today. And and uh markets will respond to that and and have a little bit uh in the weeks uh since uh since the Fed meeting.

SPEAKER_00 10:21

Yeah, because in the Gene meeting, rates were held steady between 3.5%, 3.75%. But nine of the 19 Fed officials now favor high rates before year end, including six who are projecting two-quarter point increases. That's a dramatic reversal from March when nobody was penciling in the hike. What does that shift tell us?

SPEAKER_02 10:42

I think that shift tells us too much. Uh the dot plot has been wrong for uh for a long time. The summary of economic projections has been wrong since it was incepted. Uh the Fed governors know just as much about what the next 18 months uh to 36 months looks like as the rest of us do. And um, and so uh, you know, telling us what they think they might do in the future under unknown circumstances or their best guess at what circumstances are going to be is relatively useless information. And uh it's it's fun for traders of treasury futures, but for everyone else, it's it's pretty useless. And uh I think I think uh Kevin Worsh understands this, and that's why he wants to do away with some of these uh forward guidance mechanisms.

SPEAKER_00 11:43

Well, let's let's step back a little bit. Let's talk about Powell because he chose to stay on as a governor after stepping down his share, right? So he he voted at the G meeting. How unusual is this dynamic? I mean, does it create any complications for Wars as he tries to establish his own direction?

SPEAKER_02 12:00

It's definitely unusual for a uh Fed chairman to stay on as a governor once his term is over. Um, I don't think I'm gonna take a little contrarian position here and say that I don't think it it creates as much of a problem as some market pundits think it does. I think it lends credibility to the decisions that Kevin Walsh is going to make because there's a continuity between Powell and uh Chairman Warsh. And I also think that Powell can help uh Walsh, who hasn't been at the Fed for a little while, navigate uh the halls of the Fed and the different tasks, uh task forces that he's creating to deal with uh changes in policy, maybe better. Um, you know, PAL may be Warsh's uh consigliary at the Fed rather than an opponent.

SPEAKER_00 12:53

Gotcha. So Wars announced five task forces at his first press conference to examine how the Fed communicates the data it uses and the framework it uses to evaluate inflation. He's also sitting in fewer press conferences going forward and he's eliminated Ford Galleons entirely. What is the practical effect of those changes for the markets and for everyday investors?

SPEAKER_02 13:18

I think the practical uh effect is that markets are going to have to decide for themselves, based on economic data, where they want to position and not rely upon the Fed as much. Right. I think that also goes for banks and bank treasury departments that are going to have to make decisions upon what the duration of their bond portfolios look like, how much they want to lend in the current environment, and where they want to set interest rates for themselves for the future. I think it I think it is actually a pretty good thing for the markets because asset liability management at banks has been pretty poor, uh, especially for you know the smaller and medium-sized banks. And uh and again, they have they have depended upon forward guidance from the Fed rather than you know thinking and making decisions for themselves. Uh, this is gonna create an environment where banks are gonna have to really think about the future, and um, and I think that will be better for the safety of the banking system.

SPEAKER_00 14:26

No, I agree. And that last point about forward forward guidance is something I think our clients need to understand. Because for years the Fed has essentially told markets in advance, as you already stated, and Walsh has explicitly said at his first press conference that forward guidance is not well suited for this environment. So if the Fed will not be offering out, and for people who build planning assumptions around knowing what the Fed was going to do three to six months out, that paradigm's obviously changed. So, Gary, is eliminating forward guidance actually a more honest approach to monetary policy, or does the uncertainty it creates create its own set of problems for investors?

SPEAKER_02 15:08

Um, I don't think it creates a uh a new set of problems. I think it goes back to the set of problems that existed before the Fed got into the forward guidance business. And not everything was rosy about forward guidance.

SPEAKER_00 15:23

Remember, don't you remind investors when that actually was?

SPEAKER_02 15:26

Yeah. Remember that uh, you know, during the um uh during the the post-pandemic period where interest rates were at zero, uh the Fed and their their their dot plot and their SEP, the statement of economic projections, uh put out there that interest rates would be at zero for as far as the eye could see. And what did a lot of people do? A lot of people bought long duration bonds, um and uh and a lot of banks bought these long duration bonds thinking that, believing the Fed that they that interest rates would be at zero for a long period of time. Well, then we got a ton of inflation as a result of those policies. And uh and so when interest rates went up, a lot of these banks' balance sheets were underwater and they were on the verge of failing. And so the Fed had to come in and rescue all these banks from its own decision from its from its own unforced error due to forward guidance. So not telling the markets what's going on, being more focused on its actual dual mandate of stable prices and low unemployment, I think rather than trying to guide markets uh through words and and actions um that are that are obvious, um I think that is a better way to proceed forward. And I think that's where we're gonna return to.

SPEAKER_00 16:56

He described his agenda as a regime change at the band. He's saying basically he's gonna focus on returning it to its core mandate, you know, price stability, maximum employment, and pulling it back from the areas he views outside that scope, including climate policy and other economic debates. You know, is that a meaningful institutional shift, or is it more stylistic than substantiative?

SPEAKER_02 17:27

I think it's stylistic, but I think the style matters, right? Powell uh also dismissed this idea that the Fed should be weighing in on climate policy or weighing in on fiscal policy, or or you know, Powell did a did a pretty good job as all as most Fed president, Fed chairmen have done, of staying out of things that the Fed should not be involved in. Um uh and and so I think but I think stylistically it's going to be more explicit that the Fed is not going to dive into waters that that are not uh suitable for the Fed.

SPEAKER_00 18:07

Yeah. So we've talked about who Walsh is and what he's walking into. Now let's get to the part that matters most to our listeners. What does the Walsh era actually mean for someone who's planning for retirement, managing a portfolio, thinking about mortgage or running a business that carries debt?

SPEAKER_02 18:26

The main thing is that we should expect that if the Fed is going to be hawkish, that interest rates may stay, short-term interest rates may stay elevated for longer than uh than than we would have expected from his confirmation process. Um and but there is some stability that comes from that that focus on inflation, which is that if inflation does get under control, then we could see long-term interest rates, five and ten-year interest rates, start to come down a little bit. And that will have a benefit from the standpoint of business owners who are borrowing on the five and ten-year part of the curve. Uh, it will have an impact on mortgages because mortgages are often based off of the 10-year US Treasury, not Fed funds. Um, so for housing, for real estate, for uh for uh business owners, you know, stability and lower inflation are going to be positive. And for the consumer, for sure, lower inflation is going to be a positive.

SPEAKER_00 19:44

Yeah, but what about someone with a balanced investment portfolio? I mean, I mean, how should they be thinking about the duration risk on the bond side of things, given that both rate hikes and balance sheet reductions are on the tape?

SPEAKER_02 19:58

You know, this is a difficult question. And it's one that that I'm pondering every day, trying to figure this out, because you could say from a tactical point of view that a 5% 20-year, a 5% 30 year, when the Fed is going to be hawkish, boy, that looks like a really uh interesting short-term tactical move to buy significant duration for client portfolios. You have to weigh those against how long am I going to be in the position? How uh how do I know when the trade is over? And um and then because because we have to weigh that against our other known, which is that the deficit of the US government is going to be increasing dramatically from now until 2050. And uh that will put pressure on long-term interest rates to rise. So any any um any short-term down drift in yields on the long end of the curve are likely to be just that, short-term. And so it's it's a tactical trade, maybe not a long-term uh investment.

SPEAKER_00 21:10

Well, on the equity side of the markets tend to react badly to higher for longer language and even more badly to actual hike signals. So, how do you talk to clients who see volatility around the Fed start to question you know their allocation? I mean, when you think about it, that's two very different distinct questions in my mind.

SPEAKER_02 21:35

Yeah. I think I think we have to take a look at the reason why interest rates rise. And we've talked about this quite a bit in relation to stocks. If interest rates are going up for the right reasons, we that is there is significant growth in the economy, and so real interest rates are reflecting that growth in the US economy, then interest rates can go up and stocks can go up. And it can be healthy. If interest rates are going up for the wrong reasons, that is, we have rampant inflation, that's not good for profit margins. And if it's not good for profit margins, it's not good for stocks. And it can be a double whammy because uh lower profits and higher interest rates uh negatively affect the sort of the the uh discounted cash flow model of valuation. And so that that's you know, stocks potentially drop precipitously.

SPEAKER_00 22:36

Yeah, let's talk about real estate investors and anyone carrying burial rate debt. Is there a realistic path to meaningful lower mortgage rates in the next 12 months? And how should people plan around that reality rather than expectation that there may still like like from prior cycles, right? But let's think about the future, not the past.

SPEAKER_02 22:59

Yeah. Real estate investors on the commercial side that I've that I've talked to in the past that have been very successful have always penciled in a higher interest rate uh going into their investments than than they would get. They're always trying to worst-case and safe side what these investments look like, whether it's whether it's the interest rate that they're gonna get from their lender on debt or whether it's the uh the the cap rate that they put on their sale, you know, 10 years out in their model. Um you know, anybody who's safe siding those things is is doing the right kind of analysis uh when they when they go in to be a buyer. Um and if interest rates are lower, that's fantastic. But uh, you know, you know, in in my in my past, you know, we've sold real estate at at the highs, and those buyers uh you know penciled in, you know, uh, you know, 99% occupancy, you know, rental rates that were going to go up forever, and interest rates that would be very, very low. And guess what? Uh their returns were not very good. So I think it's it's a matter of making sure that when you pencil things in that you're being conservative. Um, and uh, and then if if war if Warsh is successful, then all of those things will turn into uh profits for you.

SPEAKER_00 24:26

Yeah, you know, he was a he's been a longtime advocate for the Fed, you know, about reducing their balance sheet. And then he's views the expanded balance sheet from code areas creating capital misallocation across the economy. What's the practical effect of a sustained balance sheet reduction on long-term rates, even if short-term rates eventually come down?

SPEAKER_02 24:51

You know, we don't know yet. Um, and the reason we don't know is because we've the Fed has never really been in this position before. And so um we have done some quantitative tightening. We have we have some evidence that the relationship between long-term interest rates and the reduction of long-duration assets on the Fed balance sheet is not terribly significant. That the Fed can, you know, if it moves out of out of its longer-term positions by letting things mature uh over time, uh and and by selling them in a in a way that is communicated effectively to the to the market, then it doesn't necessarily have to move interest rates dramatically or move asset prices dramatically. So I guess this is one area where forward guidance in terms of here's how much we're selling down, here's the way that we're gonna reduce our balance sheet uh is important. And and don't forget that the Fed doesn't never do any of these things in isolation. There, you know, there's a group of banks and groups of economists that the Fed consults um, you know, its primary dealer network to say, here's what we're thinking about doing, here's where we're thinking about uh moving. And the New York Fed is very, very good about communicating, you know, what its daily uh and and monthly and longer term uh plans are for uh for asset sales and purchases. Um and so I think the Fed the Fed will be very, very um uh will continue to be very professional on that level.

SPEAKER_00 26:35

Well, what about business owners are carrying lines of credit and they're thinking about capital investments? What's the honest message about the cost of capital in this environment over the next 12 to 24 months, in your opinion?

SPEAKER_02 26:48

You know, I think the cost of capital has gone up. And um, and it's it's gone up uh, you know, as as we've seen, uh, you know, equity, equity has gone up quite a bit. Uh so the cost of equity is higher, um, the cost of debt is higher. Um and I think those those are likely to stay where they are for some period of time. That we've gotten back to a more normal cost of capital environment, um, you know, with with interest rates sort of where they are today. Uh business owners thinking about those decisions, again, should should pencil in safe side assumptions, uh, you know, assuming that interest rates and cost of capital will will go up rather than down. Um and uh and and the other thing is um, you know, there's always a good place for interest rate sensitivity analysis. Insurance companies have been doing this for a very, very long time, and we used to we used to do uh you know thousands of iterations of it, but it all starts with something like the what what in the insurance industry is called the New York 7, which is there's seven different interest rate uh change assumptions that are that are meted out over time, where interest rates go up gradually, or they spike higher initially and then remain flat, you know, or they go up and then they go down, or they go down and then they go up. And so doing some of that sensitivity analysis uh can also be helpful uh just to see what your range of outcomes looks like and whether you're okay with that kind of uh range of distributions of outcomes.

SPEAKER_00 28:35

One thing I'd like to add from a pure financial planning standpoint is that the Walsh Air introduces what I would call a genuine uncertainty premium. He's not going to tell you where rates are going. His colleagues could could his colleagues could disagree publicly. The geopolitical environment, specifically the Middle East situation and oil prices, you know, they're introducing variables that nobody can relieve the forecast. That means that the planning uh framework that we put together has to shift from when will the Fed cut to what does our plan look like across multiple rate scenarios? It's a different posture and it's a more honest one. So, Gary, what does a properly stressed tested financial plan look like in this environment? And what variables should people be running scenarios around?

SPEAKER_02 29:24

I think uh testing your your plan around uh crises is important. Um, you know, using the past is never exactly like uh like the future, but we know that things do rhyme. You know, we do know that you know stocks go down 20% every now and then. And so testing your your plan around that and when it happens, because because it's two dimensions, it's price and time, right? So testing the testing around those those types of things and when it hits your specific life events, um, those are those are going to be crucial items to determine you know how you're planning. And of course, that's something that uh our financial planners at Concord do for their clients.

SPEAKER_00 30:11

So do you think the job market, right, the strength that we're currently seeing kind of has a meaningful offset to the inflation concern? And if if you do, how do you think about the overall economic backdrop as Wars tries to find this footy movable?

SPEAKER_02 30:28

Yeah, I think I think that the uh job market is still strong. You know, we still see unemployment claims and continuing unemployment claims to be uh you know near near you know multi-year lows. Um and uh and so the employment picture in the US still looks looks good. So I think that gives uh the Fed some room if they wanted to raise rates or even hint at raising rates, uh, you know, that that that gives that gives them some room to do that. Um I think one thing that I wrote about in my last insight piece, though, is that the majority of the inflation that we're seeing today, if if oil starts to come down, the majority of the inflation that we're seeing today is related to core economic growth in the U.S. Right and and uh and especially in core services inflation. And so, you know, getting core services inflation down is going to have to involve slowing some of the uh the business investment in the US that's going on today, uh which is also helping to ensure that unemployment relate uh stays low. Um so the but but that's nothing new. The Fed has always had a very tough job balancing inflation and unemployment, and uh those dynamics are gonna be uh in play uh you know for the Fed going forward, and the Warsh Fed is gonna have to figure it out just like everyone else is.

SPEAKER_00 32:05

Yeah, yeah, I agree. So, Gabe, we talked about who Kevin Morse is and why his background matters. We talked about the environment he kind of walked into and the signals from his first meeting, and we talked about what this all means practically for investors, real estate owners, and business operators is always. I want to close with the three big questions. And the first one is what is the single most important thing that matters right now when it comes to Kevin Morse and the direction of monetary policy?

SPEAKER_02 32:39

I think the single biggest thing that matters is the two-year treasury. Uh the two-year treasury yield has an almost perfect track record of telling us what what the Fed's next move is likely to be. And so I think following the two-year treasury, if we're gonna get less uh forward guidance and less talking from the Fed is gonna be an even more important indicator.

SPEAKER_00 33:03

That um I think that's a good thing, but it scares me a little bit too. So we'll we'll watch that. So so what are you gonna be watching over the next season, next six to twelve months that everybody in this audience should have on their radar?

SPEAKER_02 33:18

Over the next six to twelve months, these task forces that Kevin Warsh is setting up inside the Fed to change the way that they look at how they calculate inflation and other economic measures, that take a look at you know how they formulate policy, uh, you know, how they organize themselves, those are going to be crucial to uh because those are likely to stay around for a long time. So they're they're gonna be really important for us to see how they evolve and and and what effect uh they may have on the on the economy.

SPEAKER_00 33:51

And finally, what is the one thing that investors and business owners absolutely need to avoid right now, given this environment?

SPEAKER_02 34:00

I think investors need to avoid jumping to conclusions about Kevin Walsh based upon their uh their political bent. Um and uh and and boy, I I hope that the president of the United States also avoids that uh jumping to conclusions if Walsh doesn't do exactly what he wants him to do. Totally.

SPEAKER_00 34:24

Um the Federal Reserve, in my opinion, doesn't get talked about enough in personal financial planning. People know it matters, but the connection between what happens in Washington and what happens to their portfolio, their mortgage, their business line of credit often feels abstract. Today, I hope we made him a little less abstract. Kevin Wars is new to this job, but he's not new to this world. He's been thinking about these questions for 20 years. The environment he is navigating is genuinely difficult. Inflation is up, geopolitical risk is real, the president who appointed him wants lower rates, and the dad is not cooperating with any of that right now. What does not change is this fundamentals of a sales financial plan they they're predicting trying to what the Fed is going to do. We don't do that. They depend on building a plan that is resilient across multiple scenarios, that does not require the environment to cooperate perfectly, and it keeps you focused on long-term decision when short-term noise is the loudest. If any of today's conversations raise questions about your own plan, whether that's your portfolio allocation, your debt structure, your real estate, or your retirement timeline, that's exactly the conversation we're here to have. Reach out to our team at Concord Wealth Partners. Gary, great conversation as always. Thanks, Wade. Thank you guys, and that is exactly why we call this built to last. See you next time.

Announcer 36:04

This podcast is produced by Concord Wealth Partners, LLC, an investment advisor registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Registration does not imply a certain level of skill or training. The information presented is for educational and informational purposes only and should not be construed as personalized investment, financial tax, or legal advice. Nothing discussed should be considered a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security or investment product. All investing involves risk, including the potential loss of principal. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results. Individual results will vary based on personal financial circumstances, risk tolerance, and other factors. Conquered Wealth Partners does not provide tax or accounting services. Tax and accounting services are offered through Concord Business and Tax Advisory, an affiliated CPA firm. For more information about Conquered Wealth Partners, including our Form ADV, Part 2A, and Form C R S, please visit ConcordWealthpartners.com or contact us at 800 838 4370.