Home Blog

TikTok Influencers Promise Easy Passive Income—A Real-World Test Reveals How Much People Actually Make


A 2026 investigation found that popular TikTok-style passive income strategies can require hours of unpaid work and significant startup expenses. Real-world earnings often fall far short of the effortless income promoted online. FotoField/Shutterstock

Scroll through TikTok long enough, and you’ll probably encounter someone promising to teach you how to make $5,000 a month without leaving your couch. Some influencers claim you can sell digital downloads, create products using artificial intelligence, or earn commissions while you sleep. The videos make it look simple, but a recent real-world experiment suggests the financial reality can be dramatically different.

In an October 2026 investigation published by The Guardian, a journalist tested popular online money-making strategies promoted by social media influencers. The results included hours of unpaid work, unexpected startup expenses, and disappointing earnings.

The findings raise an important question for Americans searching for additional income: Is passive income really possible, or are influencers making more money selling the dream than their followers make following it?

The Real-World Test That Exposed the Passive Income Problem

The Guardian’s investigation examined several popular passive income side hustles, including selling digital templates on Etsy and attempting affiliate marketing. The journalist spent more than 23 hours designing stationery templates and invested over $200 in tools and related expenses, yet the experiment ultimately produced a financial loss.

Affiliate marketing also proved challenging because some platforms rejected applications, while the lack of an established online audience made generating commissions difficult. These weren’t necessarily fraudulent opportunities, but they required far more effort, preparation, and marketing knowledge than many promotional videos suggest. The experiment demonstrated how an opportunity advertised as effortless income can quickly become an unpaid second job.

Selling Digital Products Isn’t as Easy as TikTok Makes It Look

One of the most frequently promoted passive income side hustles involves creating digital planners, printable calendars, or budgeting templates and selling them through online marketplaces. Influencers often emphasize that a digital product can theoretically sell repeatedly without requiring additional manufacturing or shipping costs.

However, the Guardian’s experiment showed that creating attractive products, learning design software, and getting customers to notice a listing can require considerable time and money. Even after a product is finished, sellers may face listing fees, transaction charges, advertising expenses, and competition from thousands of similar downloads. A digital planner that sells for $5 might sound profitable, but earning $500 would require 100 sales before accounting for expenses, refunds, and taxes.

Affiliate Marketing Requires Something Most Beginners Don’t Have

Affiliate marketing is another popular strategy promoted as a way to earn money without creating a product or maintaining inventory. The basic concept involves recommending products through specialized links and receiving commissions when qualifying purchases occur. However, the Guardian investigation found that getting accepted into affiliate programs and attracting potential buyers could be difficult without an established audience.

Someone with 50 social media followers generally faces a different earning opportunity than an influencer with 500,000 followers and years of audience-building experience. For beginners, affiliate marketing is often better understood as a marketing business that requires ongoing content creation rather than a reliable source of immediate passive income.

One Side Hustle Tester Found the Real Money Was Elsewhere

Another revealing example comes from Ryan, the creator behind Side Hustle Review, who has built a substantial social media following by testing online earning opportunities. In a 2026 Fast Company interview, Ryan reported generating approximately $5,000 in gross revenue from testing side hustles in 2024. However, his content business reviewing those opportunities generated approximately $35,000 during the same period, with about 90% of that revenue coming from sponsorships.

That distinction matters because the income from reviewing money-making opportunities substantially exceeded the money earned from actually testing them. His experience illustrates an important lesson: influencers discussing passive income side hustles may earn more from their audiences, sponsorships, or educational products than from the underlying opportunities themselves.

Some People Do Make Money, but Their Results Aren’t Typical

The disappointing results don’t mean every online side hustle is worthless or that successful sellers are necessarily exaggerating their earnings. The Guardian highlighted examples of entrepreneurs generating substantial revenue from digital products, including a seller who reported more than $146,000 in Etsy sales involving AI-generated mockups.

However, successful entrepreneurs often bring valuable skills, marketing experience, established audiences, and considerable time investments to their businesses. Their earnings also shouldn’t be confused with take-home profit because revenue doesn’t account for expenses, taxes, software subscriptions, or the value of unpaid labor. When evaluating passive income side hustles, it’s important to distinguish exceptional success stories from realistic expectations for someone starting without experience or an existing customer base.

A Different TikTok Experiment Found Three Opportunities Worth Keeping

Not every social media side hustle experiment ended with disappointing results, although the successful opportunities weren’t truly passive. Content creator Jackie Mitchell described testing numerous ways to earn extra money during a 100-day challenge. She identified paid focus groups, research studies through Prolific, and rewards earned through Swagbucks as three options she continued using.

Mitchell reported that some focus groups paid approximately $100 to $300 per session, while certain research opportunities could produce hourly earnings of around $30 when work was available. However, she emphasized that qualifying opportunities were inconsistent, earnings required active participation, and some platforms involved sharing personal information.

The FTC Has Warned About Expensive Passive Income Promises

Some questionable online earning opportunities go beyond unrealistic expectations and become outright consumer protection concerns. In March 2025, the Federal Trade Commission announced action against Click Profit, alleging that the company falsely promised substantial passive income through AI-powered online stores.

According to the FTC’s complaint, consumers paid management fees of at least $45,000, plus additional inventory expenses, while many failed to recover their investments. The agency reported that more than one-fifth of the company’s Amazon stores generated no revenue after Amazon’s fees, and another third produced less than $2,500 in gross lifetime sales. Although not every paid course or online business opportunity is a scam, the case demonstrates why consumers should be skeptical of guaranteed earnings, expensive startup packages, and promises of financial freedom with little work.

Calculate Your Actual Hourly Earnings Before Committing

One practical way to evaluate passive income side hustles is to calculate earnings after expenses and compare the result with the time invested. Imagine spending 25 hours creating digital products, paying $75 for software and marketplace fees, and generating $150 in sales during your first month.

Your profit would be $75 before taxes, translating to just $3 per hour for the time spent developing and selling those products. That doesn’t automatically make the business a failure because future sales could improve the return on the original investment, but those sales are never guaranteed. Tracking time, revenue, expenses, and actual cash received provides a more accurate picture than relying on screenshots of impressive sales figures shared by influencers.

Easy Money Usually Comes With a Hidden Cost

The appeal of passive income side hustles is understandable, especially when groceries, housing, and everyday expenses are stretching household budgets. However, the latest real-world experiments suggest that many opportunities require substantial upfront effort, specialized skills, or an established audience before meaningful income becomes possible. Consumers should research platforms carefully, avoid paying large fees based on promised returns, and consider whether a traditional part-time job or freelance service might produce more predictable earnings. Online businesses can become profitable over time, but treating them as genuine businesses rather than effortless shortcuts offers a more realistic starting point.

Have you tried a passive income idea promoted on TikTok or another social media platform, and did you actually make money? Share your experience in the comments.

What to Read Next

The 5 Biggest Scams on TikTok Right Now

12 Viral TikTok Tips About Ways To Save Money Each Month—Tested So You Don’t Have To

Ever Wondered How Much Money You Can Make on TikTok? Here’s the Surprising Truth!

The PHP bug marks a dangerous new era for the internet. OpenAI’s poised to cash in



Welcome to Eye on AI. Emily Forlini here, filling in for Beatrice Nolan. In today’s issue:

  • Researchers discover a security flaw affecting 70% of the web
  • Anthropic could file for IPO as soon as tomorrow
  • Anthropic unveils Duet, its rival to OpenAI’s Dots and Meta’s Muse
  • AI-driven layoffs at Barclay’s

I’ve been covering the growing number of AI-powered hacks for months now, going back to when OpenAI’s models autonomously attacked Hugging Face in July. Ever since then there’s been a steady drumbeat of incidents, and this month the tempo of alarming cyber news picked up considerably.

There have been more than 20 cybersecurity incidents in October, many just this week. The internet may officially be entering a new era, one in which sites are inherently less safe than they used to be. Cybersecurity paranoia is becoming table stakes for anyone who aims to conduct business online. Some are saying that the new “moat” for businesses is becoming how well they can protect their customers and IP from from AI-powered cyberattacks—not necessarily what that IP or customer base actually is.

Security professionals have long been warning that increasingly powerful AI tools would empower bad actors to exploit bugs in code. This week, experts told me, those warnings are now coming true. AI models have become noticeably more powerful at cyber tasks in recent months. Specifically, they’re better at processing large amounts of code, and acting autonomously. Hackers are having greater success setting off AI agents on evil missions. Sometimes, many AIs work together in groups known as agent swarms. These swarms move quicker than a human could keep up with.

So what’s an organization to do in the face of these threats? The only answer is to fight back with AI, meaning to proactively “hack” your own code, finding bugs before bad actors do and then patching them before AI-armed hackers can strike. That’s exactly what happened this week in an incident that has already become the poster child for the coming wave of AI-powered attacks. The incident involved a legacy programming language called PHP.

The PHP flaw heard ’round the world

In August, multiple research teams at different organizations, all of them using AI models to help them hunt for security flaws, found two vulnerabilities in PHP, which an estimated 70% of the web runs on. Those two bugs, as well as the method for exploiting them, are now collectively named “php2shell.” OpenAI’s GPT-5.6 Sol model seems to have played a key role in this discovery, although other models, including Google’s Gemini 4 Argon, seem also to have played a part.

The researchers treated the discovery as an emergency, but the public didn’t find out about it until this week, when on Oct. 20 the PHP foundation announced it would be issuing a critical patch within the next 24 hours. The following day, a coalition of companies—including OpenAI, Wiz, Calif, and more—that had been privately working on a fix formally disclosed it. For the full story on who first discovered the bug, and how the companies worked together over the past two months, check out the article I wrote on this earlier this week.

This would be a purely good news story about a potential crisis successfully averted except for a few inconvenient facts. One is that news of the vulnerabilities and how to exploit them seems to have leaked in the days leading up to PHP’s announcement. According to Amazon Web Services, hackers started exploiting php2shell on Oct. 17, prior to the public disclosure. It’s possible they knew about the bug, which several organizations, including Amazon, had been notified about in advance. They had all agreed to a specific time—14:00 UTC on Oct. 21—when they could post about it as to not tip off the hackers early.

The other problem was the day-long window between PHP announcing that it was about to issue a patch and when it actually issued the patch, combined with the time lag that it naturally takes many companies to update their systems after the patch was issued. After the public disclosure of the exploit, the floodgates opened, and as of this writing there have been “millions” of attempts to exploit the bugs, while websites around the world built on flawed PHP code scramble to implement the patch. That work is still going on now. Luckily, the service most affected by the bug, WordPress, reports no issues. (Separately, Fortune published a great story this week on a failed coup of WordPress’s founder that’s worth a read.) Still, many governments and some private entities decided to take some web services offline to protect them from potential attacks while waiting for the patch to be implemented. This did save those sites from damage, but it also deprived people of the ability to use those services.

Turning hacks into cash

For organizations selling defensive AI cybersecurity tools, this is all very good news. That includes OpenAI. The company has been building out its Daybreak program, which is an application-only initiative that grants organizations access to its most sophisticated tools to help defend against sophisticated, AI-powered attacks.

The program is growing rapidly. Two weeks ago, OpenAI updated the Daybreak website with new numbers. The number of software flaws its participants have found swelled from 858 to 1,885. The number of patches produced went from 263 to 661. The more companies and cybersecurity professionals enroll, the more people are using OpenAI’s tools to proactively find and patch bugs in their code.

The PHP issue has raised further awareness of this program. OpenAI cofounder and president Greg Brockman gave it a boost too with an X post about the PHP exploit and OpenAI’s role in discovering it—a rare, lengthy post he has now pinned to the top of his profile. Brockman also hired a new chief revenue officer over the summer with a cybersecurity background, and tasked him with building out a sales team that can pitch its defensive software to companies.

OpenAI is also planning to debut a new cybersecurity-focused model this fall, as well as a first-of-its kind tool to help businesses deploy it more easily across their infrastructure. The company seems to have made a proactive bet on AI-powered cybersecurity tools being a burgeoning source of revenue, and that prediction is coming true. And they’re far from the only ones in this business; Anthropic has a similar program for cybersecurity professionals at vetted organizations called Project Glasswing, and multiple other SaaS providers offer AI-powered cyber defense tools.

They could be looking at some serious cash if the trend continues—and as long as the hackers don’t get to them first.

With that, here’s more AI news.

Emily Forlini
emily.forlini@fortune.com
@emilyforlini

FORTUNE ON AI

AI tools discovered the PHP vulnerability that could take down 70% of the internet. Now, the race is on to patch it before AI-powered hackers attack—by Emily Forlini

Exclusive: AI code-testing startup Blacksmith hits $1 billion valuation as AI-written code surges—by Beatrice Nolan

Anthropic adds Harvard astrophysicist to the trust that controls its board—by Jeremy Kahn

Powerful new AI models are fueling a growing wave of cyberattacks, experts say—by Emily Forlini

AI IN THE NEWS

Anthropic could make its IPO prospectus public as soon as tomorrow. The public may finally get answers to many outstanding questions about Anthropic’s business and its finances when the company makes public the prospectus for its planned IPO, a move that could come as soon as tomorrow, according to three people familiar the company’s plans who spoke to Yahoo! Finance. Anthropic’s public stock offering could be the largest in history, valuing the Claude maker at more than $2 trillion. 

Anthropic unveils its Duet personal agent. It’s the company’s answer to personal assistant AI agents such as Instinct, Meta’s Muse, and OpenAI’s Dots, but it’s only available now as a preview. Read more here from Engadget. 

Microsoft discloses ‘hundreds’ of autonomous AI-powered hack by China state-aligned actor. The hacking group, known as Storm-0940, used an open-source AI platform called Artex, developed in China. That’s the same technology behind a hack of South Korean banks earlier this month. Read more here on the Microsoft blog.

EYE ON AI NUMBERS

10%

That’s how much of the internal traffic to OpenAI’s Codex coding tool went unmonitored for months this spring due to gaps in OpenAI’s internal safety and monitoring procedures, according to AI safety firms Redwood Research and METR. The firms were embedded at OpenAI for three weeks from July 21 to Aug. 11, during which they performed an independent audit of OpenAI’s security posture. They found that from May to July OpenAI’s Codex agent traffic was unmonitored, creating a “coverage gap that agents could have exploited to misbehave without being caught.” These are the same months leading up to and during the Hugging Face cyber incident, although the report does not say the lack of monitoring played a role in that case. METR and Redwood also found numerous other gaps in OpenAI’s monitoring systems. 

 

AI CALENDAR

Nov. 9-12: Web Summit, Lisbon, Portugal.

Nov. 16-17: Fortune 500 Innovation Forum, Detroit. Apply here to attend.

Nov. 18-19: Slush, Helsinki, Finland.

Dec. 6-12: Neural Information Processing Systems (Neurips) conference. Sydney, Australia.

Dec. 7-8: Fortune Brainstorm AI, San Francisco. Apply here to attend.

BoxGroup’s Claire Smilow is scouting college campuses for the next generation of founders



Claire Smilow has spent years scouting talented people before they become the next big thing in tech. That instinct paid off in 2019, when she was blown away by a sophomore at MIT who already had a strategic and commercial vision. Smilow played the long game in seeing his talents through—and it led to a billion-dollar payoff. 

The investor first met Michael Truell while conducting case study interviews for her student VC firm, Dorm Room Fund. At the time, Truell hadn’t founded a company; but three years later, the venture capitalist persuaded her firm, BoxGroup, to invest in the Gen Z engineering savant’s adolescent business. The firm poured $750,000 into the recent graduate’s little-known start-up: an AI coding company called Cursor. And a couple follow-on checks and a few years later, Cursor swelled into an industry sensation, with SpaceX eventually acquiring the business for $60 billion in 2026—a deal estimated to drive $1 billion in returns to BoxGroup.

That bet cemented Smilow as the student-founder whisperer—a VC whose early conviction in Truell helped deliver a roughly 650-fold return on the firm’s original investment, alongside high gains from subsequent financing. As a partner at BoxGroup and the Dorm Room Fund, the 36-year-old is continuing to chase that success at America’s elite schools. Smilow says she sets aside a “huge” amount of time mingling with the young AI natives, with an upcoming trip to Harvard University and MIT on the books—the second time she’s visited this year. After all, 588 U.S. alumni from the two colleges have built billion-dollar companies., representing roughly 13.1% of all of America’s unicorn founders, according to a July analysis from Stanford professor Ilya Strebulaev.

“[College] is a fantastic place to recruit for the portfolio, and I often bring portfolio founders with me to campus,” Smilow tells Fortune. “On campus you get a real sense of forward-looking technological market trends. You get to hear what students at a lot of these cutting-edge research institutions are interested in, what they’re studying, what companies they want to work at…It’s a fantastic pulse on the market and our technological shifts.”

Smilow says a few entrepreneurial trends are taking over college campuses. She’s been spending a lot of time looking into frontier tech, like robotics and quantum computing; and when roughly four out of 20 to 25 students brought up brain-computer interfaces (BCI) during a fall 2024 campus conversation, she took it as a signal to pay closer attention. Two years later, she says, early-stage BCI companies are already proliferating. For Smilow, the lesson is that listening to talented people can help investors spot promising markets before they become obvious.

The VC explains that her strategy is less about a founder’s age, and more about connecting with talent before they come into their own. Some may become founders later in life, while others may never venture into the entrepreneurial life—but she says that learning about the ambitious spaces talented people are exploring is “the most authentic way” to do her job.

Over her six-and-a-half years at the firm, BoxGroup has backed the likes of Ramp and Clay in their early stages—and now, both have reached multibillion-dollar valuations. Smilow says that the firm is founder-led, working with businesses that are almost “never proven.” She’s on the lookout for promising talent whose names repeatedly come up in conversations with their peers.

“I tend to think often the best founders don’t make the best interns,” Smilow said, adding that the part-time gigs are often “boring” for young entrepreneurs. “They’re not always the most empowered positions, so I spend less time—especially for early-in-their-career founders—talking to prior bosses. There’s value in that, but I actually spend more time talking to their peers and understanding how their peers perceive them.”

American Express Fine Hotels & Resorts Credit To Require Two Night Stay, Will Include AirBnB Luxe Properties + $250 AirBnB Experiences Credit


Earlier this month it was rumored that the American Express Platinum and Business Platinum cards would be adding a $250 AirBnB experiences credit and that AirBnB Luxe Stays would be included in the $300 semi annual Fine Hotel & Resorts credit. The American Express website has now been updated to confirm that the Fine Hotel & Resorts credit will include Luxe stays and that from January 1, 2027 stays will need to be two nights or more to qualify for the credit.

Get up to $300 in statement credits semi-annually on prepaid Fine Hotels + Resorts® and The Hotel Collection bookings, and prepaid Airbnb Luxe bookings with Airbnb, made through AmexTravel.com or the Amex Travel App™ using your Platinum Card® or Business Platinum Card®. The Hotel Collection and Airbnb Luxe bookings require a minimum two-night stay. Effective January 1, 2027, Fine Hotels + Resorts® bookings will require a minimum two-night stay to be eligible for the $600 Lodging Credit.

AmEx has also confirmed the new $250 AirBnb Experiences credit, valid for experiences after booking a prepaid Airbnb Luxe stay through Amex Travel.

30-year mortgage rate eases after seven-week climb


Housing demand retreats despite this week’s relief

Demand data offer little grounds for optimism. Mortgage applications for new home purchases fell 7% in the latest week, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA).

September housing starts declined 5.2% month-over-month and 7.4% year-over-year, per the U.S. Census Bureau, while pending home sales also fell to their lowest recorded level, according to the National Association of Realtors (NAR).

“It’s not surprising that when rates climb above 7%, fewer people buy homes because fewer people can afford them,” said Chen Zhao, head of economic research at Redfin.

“The housing market continues to face significant headwinds as elevated mortgage rates and affordability pressures keep many prospective buyers on the sidelines,” said Bob Broeksmit, MBA president and CEO.

Looking ahead, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meets in November, with CME FedWatch placing hold odds at approximately 85% and December rate hike odds near 90%.

SIP Kaise Start Kare | Sip Investment In Hindi | sip kya hota hai | how to start sip for beginners



👇👇 Demat Account Opening Video

👇👇 Demat Account Opening Link

Sip Kya Hota Hai in Hindi | Sip Kaise Start Kare | sip investment in hindi | sip kya hai mutual fund

SIP Kaise Start Kare? 🤔 Is video mein maine beginners ke liye SIP (Systematic Investment Plan) ki complete step-by-step guide di hai. Agar aap Mutual Fund SIP mein investment shuru karna chahte hain aur jaana chahte hain ki SIP kya hota hai, SIP kaise kaam karta hai, kitne paise se SIP start kar sakte hain, to ye video aapke liye hai

✅ SIP Kya Hota Hai
✅ SIP Kaise Start Kare
✅ Mutual Fund SIP Investment Guide
✅ SIP for Beginners in Hindi
✅ Best SIP Investment Tips
✅ Lump Sum vs SIP
✅ Mutual Fund Investment Explained
✅ SIP Returns & Benefits

DISCLAIMER:-
This video is for educational purposes only and should not be considered financial advice. Mutual Fund and SIP investments are subject to market risks. Please do your own research or consult a financial advisor before investing.
Mutual Fund investments are subject to market risks. Read all scheme-related documents carefully before investing.

Your Queries:
sip kya hota hai
sip kya hai
sip kaise shuru karen
sip kaise start kare
sip investment in hindi
SIP investment in hindi 2026
Sip Investment
Sip investment 2026
Sip kaise start kare
sip investment phonepe
Sip investment app
Sip investment sbi bank
Sip investment in hindi
sip investment in hindi
Sip investment in hindi
SIP INVESTMENT IN HINDI
sip investment in mutual fund
sip kaise start kare
sip kya hai
sip kya hota hai
sip kya hota hai in hindi
sip hota kya hai
SIP investment in hindi
SIP investment in hindi 2026
Sip Investment
Sip investment 2026
Sip kaise start kare
sip investment phonepe
Sip investment app
Sip investment sbi bank
Sip investment in hindi
sip investment in hindi
Sip investment in hindi
SIP INVESTMENT IN HINDI
sip investment in mutual fund
sip kaise start kare
sip kya hai
sip kya hota hai
sip kya hota hai in hindi
sip hota kya hai
SIP investment in hindi
SIP investment in hindi 2026
Sip Investment
Sip investment 2026
Sip kaise start kare
sip investment phonepe
Sip investment app
Sip investment sbi bank
Sip investment in hindi
sip investment in hindi
Sip investment in hindi
SIP INVESTMENT IN HINDI
sip investment in mutual fund
sip kaise start kare
sip kya hai
sip kya hota hai
sip kya hota hai in hindi
sip hota kya hai
sip investment
mutual funds for beginners
sip investment in hindi
investment
mutual fund sip investment
sip investment kaise kare
mutual fund investment
mutual funds sip investment in hindi
best mutual funds for sip
mutual funds investment
stock market for beginners
sip investment for beginners
groww app sip investment kaise kare 2026
systematic investment plan,lumpsum investment
sip kaise start kare
sip start kaise kare
Sip investment
Sip investment in hindi

#SIP #MutualFund #SIPInvestment #SipKaiseStartKare #MutualFunds #InvestingForBeginners #Investment #PersonalFinance #Hindi #Finance #StockMarket #WealthCreation #SystematicInvestmentPlan #MutualFundSIP #FinancialFreedom #MoneyManagement #InvestmentTips #SipForBeginners #ytritik

THANKS FOR WATCHING

source

If You’re Making More Money Than Ever But Still Feel Broke, Hear This


Dave:
The US is facing an affordability crisis, or at least that seems to be what every politician is talking about right now as we’re just a few weeks away from the midterm elections. And there is a reason that we keep hearing about affordability, because it matters to Americans. Gas is over $4 a gallon, inflation just spiked up to 3.7%, and for the first time in three years, paychecks are falling behind prices. Now, six in 10 voters say the cost of living is their top economic worry. But the question is, is this actually a crisis? Does the data support the idea that things are actually less affordable than they used to be, or is there something else going on here? Today on On the Market, we’re going to answer that question with data. We’re going to measure eight parts of the household budget against wages going back to 1999, look at how Americans actually spend their money today versus the past, and dig into two numbers that I think are going to explain why everyone feels so squeezed right now, real wage growth and the savings rate.
This is On the Market. Let’s get to it.
Hey everyone, welcome to On the Market. I’m Dave Meyer, investor, housing analyst, and chief investment officer at BiggerPockets. Last week on the show, we went deep into affordability, but we focused on housing. I have to say, we got great feedback about that show. Thank you all so much for listening. It was one of the best received shows I think that we have ever had, so appreciate that. If you didn’t hear it yet, go back and check it out, but I’ll just give you a TLDR. We talked about what it would take for the housing market to get back to “normal levels of affordability” and the answer is a lot. It’s not happening anytime soon. Just since 2019, the typical mortgage payment is up 116%, so more than double. Meanwhile, family incomes have only gone up 37%. So relief in the housing market is going to take a while.
Again, if you missed it, go check out that episode. But because of that, and honestly, I’ve wanted to make this show for a long time, we’re going to do something else this week. We’re going to broaden the scope and talk about affordability in general, the whole household budget. We’re going to talk about healthcare, transportation, rent, childcare, college, energy, food, all of it. And this stuff matters a lot for investors. It matters for rent growth, and it also matters a lot, in my opinion, when we talk about the potential for a recession and what that could do for the housing market and to our portfolios, because if people can’t afford to spend on rent, other goods and services, things in the economy can break. And I actually think this is a very good time to talk about this. Again, I wanted to do this episode for a while, but it does seem that affordability is kind of the issue in the 2026 midterms.
There was just a Fox News poll that just came out and said six in 10 voters say cost of living is their top economic worry and 55% say inflation is “not at all under control.” So people really care about this and it’s going to shape what happens in November with the election. I just want to say, I have no political intentions for this. I’m not telling you who to vote for. Both parties are using this word. It’s just getting used so much. I decided to figure out for myself what is real about a “affordability crisis” and what is not. So today we’re going to answer three questions. First is, is the affordability crisis real? Where is it real? And where isn’t it real? And what’s actually not being measured in the data that could be driving some of this sentiment around an affordability crisis? So that’s the plan.
Let’s get to it. First up, we’re just going to talk about how we’re measuring affordability. I like to just always explain how I’m doing these analysis so you can follow along. And the first thing you need to know is that I’m talking about something affordability. It’s a little bit different than inflation. What inflation measures is how much prices went up year over year or month over month. It doesn’t tell you whether or not you can afford those things. If we want to measure affordability, we have to look at two things. We need to look at prices, yes, and if they’re going up, but we also have to compare that to paychecks and income and whether those things are growing at the same rate or one is growing faster than the other. As an example, let’s just use eggs because eggs have gone through a roller coaster of prices over the last couple of years.
Remember those weeks when you couldn’t get eggs? That was crazy. Anyway, if eggs prices go up, let’s just say 30%, that’s a lot. But if your paycheck at the same time goes up 35%, relatively speaking, eggs got more affordable relative to your paycheck. And so that’s how we’re going to be measuring this, prices versus paychecks. And our yardstick that we’re going to be using is the Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes median weekly earnings for full-time workers. This is basically just typical person in America’s paycheck. So that’s the paycheck side. And then for prices, we’re going to use the CPI, the Consumer Price Index. This is the most common measure of inflation, again, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And I’m going to compare the first half averages, so January to June for four different periods. We’re going to do today and then we’re going to look back to 2019, 2009 and 1999.
And I kind of just picked those years a little bit randomly, but I wanted to compare today to pre-pandemic because that’s been a period of a lot of inflation. And then just to go 10 years back into 2009 and 10 years before that, I did 1999. So that’s the methodology that we’re using. Let’s get to the scorecard. Let’s just see where we’re at today. And I’m going to throw this up here on YouTube if you’re watching on YouTube, but if you’re listening to this on audio, I’ll just describe to you. But basically if you compare wages today to where they were in 2019 before the pandemic, they have gone up 37%, which is not bad, right? Since 2009, they’ve gone up 69%. And since 1999, they’ve more than doubled. They’re up 130%. Now compare those wages to the Consumer Price Index, and you’re going to be surprised by this, but what it shows is that the Consumer Price Index over that same period only went up 30%.
So wages went up 37% since 2019. The CPI, the Consumer Price Index, only went up 30%, meaning that headline big picture number here, wages have been growing faster than consumer prices. And that should mean that just by that one sliver of this analysis alone, that means that an affordability crisis should be no more real today than it was in 2019. Now that is obviously not the whole story here, and we’re going to get into some of the caveats and break this thing down because that’s where the story really is. But headline, wages have in aggregate grown faster than CPI. I should also say that the same thing is true since 2009 where wages have gone up 69% compared to 55% for consumer goods. And in 1999, it was 130% versus 100%. So all three different timelines that we’re looking up, wages have grown faster than the CPI, but not that much more, but they are up.
But if you break this thing down by category, that’s where things really get interesting. So most notably, energy costs, for example, that’s on everyone’s mind right now. That’s where things have really gotten crazy recently. These are everything from electricity to gas to diesel. Since 2019, wages are up 37%, but energy is up 45%, making it less affordable. Since 1999, wages went up 130%, but energy went up 205%. So energy is one example, but I think there are other ones too. So the big one, we all know if you listened to the episode last week is housing. This one is just massive. It’s not in the CPI, and that’s a really important thing here. Home prices are not measured in the consumer price index. So it is not reflected in inflation data, but it’s one of the biggest things. Mortgage payments have gone up 116% versus just 37% for income.
So this to me, if you’re talking about a crisis, that’s a crisis, right? When you talk about mortgage payments more than doubling and your income only going up 37%, it’s hard to argue this is anything but a crisis. Housing affordability is awful right now. We know this. We’ve been talking about this for four years on the show, but that’s just another example. A third example where I think you could say there is a crisis as well. Energy is up, I don’t know if you call it a crisis, long-term. In the last year, it’s definitely been a crisis, buying a home, but also college and childcare, you probably all know this if you have a family or if you have student debt, but tuition in terms of childcare and college and lumping them together has gone up 200% since 1999, 200% versus 130% over the same period for wages.
So again, these things are getting much less affordable. We also see rent has outpaced wage growth and health insurance has actually stayed somewhat steady over the last 30 years or so, but it is probably about to get worse. If you’ve seen any of the data out there about how much insurance premiums are going to go up next year, I think people are going to be shocked. You can see that they’re going to go up very, very significantly for people across the board next year. And so we are going to see a decline in affordability in health insurance on top of rent, home prices, energy, childcare and college. So when you break it down, that is where we see real affordability challenges. Where we don’t actually see it or where we don’t see it as much is food. I got to be honest, I was surprised to see this because every time I go to the grocery store, I’m just shocked these days.
I can’t believe the prices. But actually, if you look at using our methodology, food prices since 1999 up 113%, wages up 130%. So groceries are actually relatively more affordable than they were 27 years ago. Even just since the pandemic, it’s about even. And so although I agree, to me, grocery prices seem insane. It feels really crazy to me, but the data does not support the idea that groceries are growing faster than wages. Other things that have stayed relatively the same, transportation, so cars, and then just the big bucket. If you look at everything combined in the CPI, it’s not that crazy. Remember, so these are things like car insurance, home insurance, your cell phone bill, your internet bill, all those things combined also have been relatively flat. So if you just look at this data, the answer to the question, is there affordability crisis? It depends on who you are and where you are in life.
If you’re trying to buy a home, yes. If you rely on diesel or have a long commute and you pay a lot for gas, yes. Do you have a family? If you’re trying to send a kid to college, you’re trying to pay for college yourself. Do you have childcare? Yes. But the overall basket, wages have actually kept ahead of prices in most of these categories, and that’s the puzzle we need to solve, because if the data is telling us that actually the CPI and wages have been somewhat close and wages have outpaced this API, why is everyone talking about affordability right now? That is a hugely important question, and we’re going to get to it right after this quick break. Stick with us.
Welcome back to On the Market. I’m Dave Meyer. Today we’re talking about affordability in the United States. And before the break, we talked about the fact that since 1999, and yes, even since from 2019 until now, if you look at wage growth as measured as by the BLS and you look at the CPI, the Consumer Price Index, wages have grown faster than inflation. And that’s good. We want that to happen. That is good news. But the question then becomes why are we struggling with affordability or why are people talking about affordability so much? Let’s break this down because this is hugely important to us as investors and for our society in general. So let’s talk about this. So first up, one reason I believe that people feel affordability is so low is that wage growth is incredibly slow. Even though it is faster than inflation over the long run, it’s a kind of a slow burn.
If you look since 1999, the “real wage growth,” so that’s adjusting for inflation. So these numbers are going to be different from what I was saying before, but if you adjust for inflation, how much are wages growing over inflation? It’s only 15% total in the last 27 years. So that’s roughly about half a percent a year. So that doesn’t feel like a lot, and it’s not. Actually, if you look back historically in the United States, real wage growth where your earnings grew faster than inflation has been very, very low since the early 1970s. And so I think part of it is that even though people see their paycheck going up, their actual amount that they can save or the amount of things that they can buy don’t really go up. It does actually by half a percent a year, but you don’t really feel that, right?
It’s barely perceptible. And so it seems to me that for 27 years now, at least, and honestly longer, even though people get a raise or they get a promotion and that feels good for a minute, ultimately they say, “I actually can’t buy any more stuff because the increase over inflation is just so minor.” The second thing is that for a lot of the last five or six years, we have had negative real wage growth. So during the 2021 to 2023 inflation wave, real wages fell for two years. That hurts. We saw inflation of up to 9%. That was brief, thankfully, but from 21 to 23, there was a long period where inflation was about 5% and wages sure weren’t growing at 5% a year back then. And so we had a lot of time when spending power was going down and that hurts. People notice that quickly, and that happened for two or three years.
And although it did get better for a little while, we’ve flipped back to that again now. In 2026 where we sit today, real wage growth is negative. We are again losing power. On average, the average American is now losing spending power every single month because inflation is going up faster than their wages. And so even though the aggregate looks okay, if you just look at recent history, real wage growth hasn’t been great and there’s probably some sort of recency bias here. And I don’t blame people. I’m not saying it’s just necessarily a bias. People don’t want this. I’ve made the argument on the show many, many times that real wage growth is the number one barometer of whether an economy is succeeding or failing. And right now by that measure, we are failing. If people are working full-time and they cannot outpace inflation, that is a huge problem.
And that has been happening for a lot of the last five or six years, and it is happening right now. So real wages are negative right now, but I still think this doesn’t fully explain what is going on here. And I spent a lot of time thinking about this because I was surprised by the data, honestly, because you hear all about these affordability crisis. I’ll be honest with you, I feel it myself. I feel like things are less affordable. I look at my own budget and it just sometimes doesn’t make sense to me that I feel like I am able to save less money. And that is true across the board. You are seeing, even though we are seeing the data that I just shared with you, people are saving less. In the 60s, people at the average savings rate was about 12%. From 2010 to 2019, it was about 7.5%.
Right now, it’s around 3%. So we’re seeing this data that, yeah, prices and wages are close, wages are winning, but people are saving less. So something is missing in the data, right? That’s what we have to identify because clearly the whole picture is not being told here. And I spent a lot of time thinking about this. This is the fun part of being an analyst is trying to figure out what’s going on behind the scenes. And I came up with a list of the things that are driving this affordability crisis that people feel are happening, even though some of these headline numbers don’t suggest that they are. Number one is something I would call levels, not rates. So just because inflation has come down from the high of 2021, price level right now is 30 something percent higher than in 2019, and it’s never going to go back.
People though remember 2019 prices. They remember 2010 prices, and they tend to not remember that their paycheck has gone up. And I do this too. Everyone, I’m not saying this like blaming people, but that is just human nature, right? It’s like you look at your receipt when you go to the grocery store and you’re like, “This is crazy.” You forget perhaps that your wages went up during the same time and you’re just kind of bummed that they basically track each other and that even though you’re getting raises, you’re not increasing your spending power. The second part of this is I just think there’s price fatigue. A lot of us, myself included, if you’re a millennial, you never really went through a time of high inflation before. I was born in 1987. There was periods of brief inflation, but we’ve had pretty low inflation for most of the last 40 years.
If you grew up in the 70s and 80s, you’re used to this kind of inflation, but I just don’t think we’re used to it. And so we see prices go up. We’re not used to our wages matching them or we don’t even think about that side of the equation and we’re just tired of it. We want to go back to the time when inflation wasn’t a thing. Believe me, I want to go back too, but I think there’s just an element of fatigue around this and trying to keep up and seeing prices go up and up and up. Even if your paycheck is going up, it still feels exhausting. The second thing, and I think this is maybe the biggest one, is waiting. Weighting of the CPI. And this is a thing that is debated a lot. The CPI is not a perfect metric, far from it, but it’s the most consistent data set that we have going back in time.
So I don’t really know a better data set to use, but the Consumer Price Index, that big headline number that’s 3.7%, the people who put this together, they decide how much to weigh things like childcare versus your phone bill versus rent versus car prices versus medical care. And it is so different for everyone what the weighting actually should be, right? The CBI is measuring everything in the economy, but if you are looking to buy a home, an affordability crisis is acute for you. We know that’s the biggest one, and it’s also the biggest expense, right? We know that consistently… Actually, I pulled some data on this. If you go back in time, we’ve spent about 33, 35% of our income on housing. And if that has become so unaffordable, that unaffordability in that one bucket is going to impact your household’s overall spending far more than if your cell phone bill goes up by 40%, or even if your cell phone bill went up by 100%.
If you’re in the market for a home, this is going to really impact you. And it’s not just homes, it’s all about waiting. If you’re trying to go to college, you are probably noticing the affordability crisis. If you drive a truck or you’re in construction and you rely on diesel, you’re probably noticing an affordability crisis. If you have kids that you are sending to childcare, you’re probably going to notice the affordability crisis. So it really depends on who you are and how much each of these categories are weighted in your own personal budget. If you are any of those groups that I just talked about, you’re probably feeling it because the data actually does support that. If a lot of your money is going to one of these categories that has really gone up, like energy, like childcare and like housing, then you’re going to feel it more than people who own their home outright, who don’t drive a lot and maybe are empty nesters and don’t have kids anymore.
And honestly, this is a side note, but I think this is a generational issue for a lot of people because younger folks, they need housing, they’re not as secure, they don’t have a low basis in their homes or locked in mortgage rates. They have childcare, they’re looking for rent, they drive a lot. I think younger people are probably feeling this more than older generations. Just as an example, if you think about a young family right now, they’re trying to buy a home, they’re paying for daycare, healthcare costs are about to go up. They’re kind of hit by all three of the worst categories all at once. And so that’s why I think this waiting is probably one of the biggest elements of why people feel that there’s an affordability crisis, even though the headline data doesn’t suggest it. And if you dig into it and were to create your own bucket, you could.
There’s actually online tools that you can do this. You can go create your own basket of CPI goods and how much money you put into different things. Go do it. It’s actually pretty interesting. You’ll see that depending on where you are in your life stage, affordability might be way worse for you right now. And I know a lot of older folks like to say, oh, young people don’t work as hard, but I think the data actually suggests here that where prices have gone up the most are very concentrated for young people and young families. And so I don’t think it’s a fact that people aren’t working that hard. I think if you look at it, people are still earning wages. It’s just that the big ticket items that young people typically buy in their 20s and 30s or early 40s have gotten way, way, way more expensive than wages have gone up.
So that affordability crisis is real. So that’s a big one. There’s a couple other small ones, then I have one more big one I want to share with you. So just a couple of the other things just to reiterate that the cushion is gone. I think that’s really impacting people that their savings rates are lower and that psychologically is not great. It’s not great for anyone, but I think it’s psychologically. I also think sort of the most visible prices are the worst ones. You look at your gas bill, you see that all the time. You look at houses on Zillow right now, you see that all the time. And those things are just really visible. You don’t really think about the fact that TVs have gotten less expensive, those kinds of things. Or honestly, a lot of consumer goods have gotten less expensive over the last 20 years, but we just don’t think about that as much as some of those big picture things.
But here’s my hypothesis. I’m curious if you guys agree with this. This is something I just kind of came up with on my own. It’s just a theory. It is not backed by data, but it is just my own interpretation of the data that I’ve read and what I think is really going on here. Here it is. We all collectively are just buying more things. I think this is a huge part of it, to be honest, because the CPI measures how much goods go up. You look at one pair of headphones, how much does this exact item go up? It measures how much my phone goes up, how much does this go up, or my watch, whatever it is. It doesn’t reflect how many things that you buy. And frankly, in today’s society, I think there is a pressure to buy a lot more stuff than you used to have.
And this is not a judgment on people. I think certain people definitely overspend, do not get me wrong. I sometimes do too. I try to resist it and I encourage you all to try to resist it too, but let’s be honest, we are all market to constantly being told to buy more and more stuff. Just as an example, I was thinking about this when I was doing this analysis. I have a young daughter, she’s three months old, and the amount of stuff I need to buy for her is insane. And it’s not like I’m just going out there looking to buy stuff. It’s stuff that is recommended by doctors for me to go buy. And it is way, way, way more than what my parents needed to raise me, way more. Trust me, I have asked my parents about this. They tell me all the time, the amount of stuff that we are encouraged to buy is up.
And if you are better at resisting that, good for you. I don’t live a lavish lifestyle. I try to not buy that kind of stuff, but you do. There’s just so many things that you’re constantly encouraged to buy, and that is really hard to measure, but I think it is a big, maybe the biggest piece of this. Our economy is driven by consumers. 70% of GDP is consumer spending, and there’s a lot of marketing that goes into growing that number every single month and every single year. And so yes, prices going up on individual things is part of it, but the fact that we buy more things is also part of this feeling of affordability crisis. Just stick with me. This is a simple example, but in 1999, if you needed a hundred items to run your household, I’m just making that number up, but if you need a hundred items to run your household, and yes, wages have gone up faster than the prices of those hundred items, but now to run your household, you need 120 items, that means your budget is getting stretched, right?
Not because one individual thing got more expensive, but because everything got more expensive and we just buy more stuff. Just as another example, think about an iPhone, right? Have wages kept up with prices on an iPhone? I think largely yes. But in 1999, did you need a $1,200 cell phone every two years? Did you need a $75 a month data plan? No. Sure. Yeah. My phone offsets other things I would’ve spent money on, but I think you get my point. Now today in today’s society, you need a phone to function. What about the fact that everything is a subscription right now? You used to be able to just buy something and the fact that the price went up every year didn’t really matter because you actually owned it. Now every software, heck, even your car, certain things are on a subscription and that goes up every single year.
Buying things typically in the past is a hedge against inflation if you think about it. If you buy a car, that means you don’t have to pay the rising prices of cars until you go and buy a new one. But now if part of your car is on a subscription, that price goes up every single year, right? So we used to have a one-time expense for a baby monitor. Now your baby monitor is a subscription, and so you have more things that you have to pay for, even though the price of those things might be keeping up with inflation. Does that make sense? The more I think about this, I just think that this is kind of at the core of what’s going on. Some of it is consumer behavior. I totally get that. I’m guilty of that too, that I probably spend on stuff that I don’t necessarily need, but I’m just living a normal, comfortable lifestyle.
I don’t think of going crazier and things feel strained. And I think a lot of it is because the expectations of what we need to have to live a comfortable life have gone up, one, but two, so many things have become subscriptionized that you are just paying for things in perpetuity all the time. And that is not reflected in the CPI. That does not get reflected in inflation data. And I think that’s a lot of where people’s money is going right now. So that’s my hypothesis. I would love to know what you think because the data is kind of clear, but the interpretation of it is up to you. That’s how I’m interpreting this data is that some of it is people overspending, some of it is the expectations of us on consumers. And the third thing is really about the subscription economy that we live in where you’re constantly paying for everything.
You never get a break from paying for anything anymore. But we got to talk about one more thing. Let’s talk about what this means for the housing market and for investors. We’re going to do that right after this quick break. Stick with us.
Hey everyone. Welcome back to On the Market. I’m Dave Meyer. Today we’re talking about affordability and the bottom line from our analysis is that we’re not in an everything is unaffordable economy. We’re in an economy where certain things have gotten a lot more expensive and how unaffordable things are, I think depend a lot on what you spend your money on and what stage of life you are in right now, because things like home ownership, childcare, college, energy have all gone up a lot faster than wages. And so if you’re reliant on those things, then you are probably feeling affordability challenges more than people who don’t rely on those things as much. On top of that, we also talked about just the quantity of stuff that we buy, the quantity of services that we have and the subscriptionization. I don’t even know if that’s a word, but I’m going to make it one.
Subscriptionization of the economy is probably also leading to this as well. But let’s turn our attention to what this means for investors because there are specific implications for the housing market. I think the first one, probably the most obvious, but this is going to impact if you’re a rental property investor, your tenants, right? If people have a lower savings rate, if they have negative real wages, that means they have less room to pay Pay their rent. It means you should moderate expectations for rent increases and probably count on higher rates of nonpayment or late payments depending on the tenant profile that you are working with. I hope that’s not true and I hope that everyone who is renting can afford their rent and that you get paid on time. But if you look historically at times when these things have happened, affordability challenges have been in the economy before, this is something that happens.
And so as an investor, I recommend that you prepare for that. And the way that you do that I think is keeping more reserves. You need to keep higher reserves in case people pay late or there is non-payment or you have longer vacancies. Or if rent growth is flat for a couple of years, I think those are going to matter a lot. If you’re underwriting a new deal, do not underwrite for strong rent growth. I still think rent will grow a little bit. It tends to in these kinds of environments when there is really high housing prices because there’s more demand for rentals. I don’t know if it’s going to keep up with the pace of inflation. I think we’ll have some nominal rent growth, but I wouldn’t count on it being very robust. That’s how I would underwrite my deals right now. The second thing about keeping reserves is to also remember that your operating expenses are also going to go up.
If you pay utilities for your rentals, that’s something you need to underwrite for now. Energy prices are going up, so you need to keep an eye on that and forecast for that. Keep reserves or underwrite if you’re buying a new deal where you are paying the utilities. Other things are going to go up too. If you think about just maintenance and repair costs, a lot of construction companies, they rely on diesel. Those prices are going up, at least for the time being. Hopefully we get some resolution to this war and diesel prices go back down. But for now, I think your operating expenses are going to be negatively impacted. You’re going to see prices and materials and labor go up on a lot of these things because input costs are going up. One bright spot might be that demand for affordable units are probably going to go up.
In these kinds of environments, it depends on your market of course, but more affordable living situations, whether it’s house hacking, rent by the room, smaller units, ADUs, multi-generational setups, those kind of things I think are going to be more popular. And so if you can pivot your offering to provide affordability, that could be a great way for you to increase your occupancy and to maintain your business during this challenge. But overall big picture, I think I’ve said this last week, if you listened to the episode about housing affordability, I think the same thing is true about rents here is that until affordability improves, there’s only so much the market can better. Whether you’re talking about the rental market or the housing market, there’s not really a way around it. People have X amount of dollars and it’s getting pulled in a lot of different directions, especially for younger people.
And so if they’re getting spread out into different categories, there’s not as much room for people to spend on rent or to spend on housing. And ultimately that’s why I think housing prices need to come down in inflation adjusted terms to improve that affordability. And hopefully in the meantime, we’ll see real wage growth start to pick back up. I’m worried about AI suppressing wage growth to be honest, but hopefully I’m wrong about that. And we’ll see wage growth grow up and that could bring some life back into the rental market. It could bring some life back into the housing market, but we just don’t know when that’s going to happen. So that’s my take on the affordability crisis. Again, headline numbers, it is not as bad as I think as everyone says, but the headline numbers disguise a lot of the nuance here and there is a lot of nuance.
It really depends on what stage of life you’re in, where you spend your money, what your priorities are. And I think again, for younger people, they’re sort of getting sandwiched in a lot of different things, whether it’s the cost of childcare, the cost of college or the cost of housing, those are huge buckets. They are big weights in your budget. No matter how frugal you are, those are where your money goes. And if those things are rising faster than wages, which they are, you’re going to feel that in terms of affordability. And that’s going to cascade through the economy and I think it’s going to cascade through the housing and rental market as well. I’d love to know what you think though. Again, I shared the data, but there’s different ways to interpret it. I gave you the way I’m thinking about this, but please let me know the way you are thinking about this in the comments if you’re watching this on YouTube.
Thank you all so much for listening to this episode. I hope it was helpful for you in understanding what’s really going on with affordability in the United States. I’m Dave Meyer and I’ll see you all next time.

Help us reach new listeners on iTunes by leaving us a rating and review! It takes just 30 seconds and instructions can be found here. Thanks! We really appreciate it!

Interested in learning more about today’s sponsors or becoming a BiggerPockets partner yourself? Email [email protected].

Citi says housing sector contraction deepens as rates hit 7.5%




Citi says housing sector contraction deepens as rates hit 7.5%

Costco’s Last Stock Split Was in 2000. Is Its Board Close to Another?


Costco Wholesale (COST +1.08%) last split its stock in January 2000. Just after the 2-for-1 split, the shares sold for about $49.

Now one share costs roughly $994 as of this writing, or about what 20 shares cost back then. Even after a dip, that’s only about 9% off the warehouse club’s all-time closing high of $1,094.32, hit in May.

Investors have noticed. An analyst asked about a split on an earnings call, shareholders asked at both of the past two annual meetings, and Costco hasn’t announced one.

Could a split finally be coming?

Image source: Getty Images.

Costco says its board keeps looking at it

The fullest answer came from CFO Gary Millerchip on the company’s earnings call in December 2024. Asked about splits, Millerchip said there wasn’t a plan for one then.

He also laid out why a split matters less than before.

“[T]he economic arguments that were true in the past are a little bit less clear because retail investors and employees both have the ability now to buy fractional shares,” Millerchip said.

But he also said a lower share price can make the stock seem more affordable for the same investors and employees. And he added the company would keep talking it over with the board.

CEO Ron Vachris has given shareholders a shorter version of that answer since. At the annual meeting in January 2025, he said there was nothing to report on a split. A year later, at the meeting on Jan. 15, 2026, a shareholder asked about both a split and a special dividend.

“I have nothing to report at this time, but I can tell you that it’s being reviewed with the board, and we look at it regularly,” Vachris said.

I’d read it as a polite no for now. A split didn’t come up in Costco’s fiscal fourth-quarter call on Sept. 24, and its next annual meeting is on Jan. 21, 2027.

Two retailers that did split

Two other retailers split their shares recently, and both said they did it mostly for their employees.

Walmart (WMT +0.95%) announced a 3-for-1 split on Jan. 30, 2024, when its stock closed around $166. Back then, over 400,000 of its workers were in its stock purchase plan. O’Reilly Automotive (ORLY +1.39%) followed in March 2025, when its board approved a 15-for-1 split with the shares near $1,300.

Both CEOs even used the same words, describing the aim as letting employees buy “whole shares, rather than fractions.”

Costco’s chief financial officer, though, took the other side of that point. After all, fractions are easy to get now. Charles Schwab, for instance, lets investors buy fractional shares of most U.S.-listed stocks for as little as $1.

And the share price alone likely doesn’t force Costco’s hand. It’s about six times what Walmart’s stock cost when it announced its split, but below where O’Reilly’s was.

A split wouldn’t make Costco cheaper

Even if Costco did split its shares, its valuation would stay the same. With about 443 million shares outstanding, Costco is worth roughly $441 billion at today’s price. A 10-for-1 split would just turn that into about 4.4 billion shares at about $99 each.

What drives the stock over time is what a share earns. Costco earned $20.76 per share in fiscal 2026 (ended Aug. 30, 2026), up 14% from the year before. That’s faster than fiscal 2025’s 10% gain, so earnings growth is accelerating. Shares around $994 put the stock’s price-to-earnings ratio at about 48. That means buyers pay about $48 for every $1 Costco earned last fiscal year. And I think a price like that already asks a lot of a company growing earnings at around 14%, and a split wouldn’t change it.

COST Costco Wholesale

$1,009.09+$10.78 (+1.08%)

NASDAQ · As of 10:30 AM ET 10/22/26

If Costco wants to give shareholders something, the other item in Vachris’ answer could do it. Costco’s regular quarterly dividend of $1.47 per share works out to a yield of only around 0.6%, so it isn’t much of a dividend stock by itself. But Costco has paid five special dividends since 2012, the biggest a $15 per share payout in January 2024 that cost the company around $6.7 billion. It hasn’t paid any since.

Is a split next, then? I doubt one is close. Costco’s leaders have given the same answer at least three times since December 2024, and the chief financial officer’s point on fractional shares goes against the one Walmart and O’Reilly made.

If a split does happen, it changes the price of a share and little else. I’d focus more on the special dividend, the other item on the board’s list, because it’s the one that gives shareholders cash.

E*Trade Premium Savings Account (2026.10 Update: $400/$800 Offer)