Market Signal Briefing

Over 70 percent of patients in the first-line subgroup responded to amivantamab plus chemotherapy with most responses lasting beyond 16 months

Notable responses were also seen in patients with liver metastases, who often face poorer outcomes with this disease

, /PRNewswire/ -- Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) today announced new longer follow-up results from the investigational Phase 1b/2 OrigAMI-1 study evaluating amivantamab-vmjw, a bispecific antibody targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and MET, in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI chemotherapy in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. The encouraging anti-tumor activity, durable responses, and low rates of treatment-related discontinuations observed in this study support further investigation in ongoing Phase 3 studies in first- and second-line colorectal cancer. Results were presented during a poster session at the 2026 American Society of Clinical Oncology Gastrointestinal Cancers (ASCO GI) Symposium (Abstract #166).1

"These results show the potential of amivantamab combined with chemotherapy to deliver meaningful and durable benefit for people with advanced colorectal cancer, including for those with liver metastases who have historically faced poorer outcomes," said Dr. Filippo Pietrantonio,* M.D., Head of the Gastrointestinal Oncology Unit, IRCCS Foundation, National Cancer Institute, Milan, Italy. "Seeing patients maintain responses for extended periods, some beyond two years, is a powerful sign of progress in a disease where sustained efficacy has been hard to achieve and speaks to the promise of this treatment approach."

Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide, and a leading cause of cancer-related death.2 While traditionally seen in older adults, incidence is rising in people under 50.3 More than half of patients will eventually develop metastatic disease, with liver involvement in roughly 70 percent of cases. In this setting, resistance to current first-line therapies often develops early, shortening the time patients can benefit.4 For those with RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer with disease progression, second-line options remain limited, with historical response rates of 32 to 36 percent and median progression-free survival (PFS) of 5.4 to 6.4 months using EGFR inhibitors and chemotherapy.5,6,7,8,9,10 Research has shown that MET alterations are a frequent cause of resistance to EGFR-inhibition, highlighting a need for new approaches that target both pathways simultaneously.11

Detailed Study Results

Cohorts D and E of the Phase 1b/2 OrigAMI-1 study evaluated intravenous amivantamab as monotherapy or in combination with either FOLFOX or FOLFIRI chemotherapy in patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. Patients were confirmed to be negative for KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and EGFR mutations, and did not have HER2 amplification. They could have received one prior line of systemic therapy in the metastatic setting, and prior treatment with an EGFR inhibitor was not permitted. The primary endpoint was safety, and secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), clinical benefit rate, and PFS. Overall survival was assessed as an exploratory endpoint.1

At a median follow-up of 16 months (range, 1.2-29.5), amivantamab plus FOLFOX (n=20) or FOLFIRI (n=23) achieved a confirmed ORR of 51 percent (95 percent confidence interval [CI], 36-67) across the study, with responses observed early and a median time to first response of 8.3 weeks (range, 7.3-20.3), along with a median DOR of 9.3 months (95 percent CI, 5.8-14.7). Median PFS was 9.2 months (95 percent CI, 5.4-12.9), and median overall survival was not estimable (NE) (95 percent CI, 16.2-NE). In the first-line subgroup, ORR was 73 percent (95 percent CI, 53-86), with median DOR not yet reached at the time of data cutoff (95 percent CI, 7.3-NE). Among 11 patients treated in the first-line subgroup, four were able to proceed to curative intent surgery. In the second-line subgroup (n=32), ORR was 44 percent (95 percent CI, 26-62) and median DOR was 7.4 months (95 percent CI, 5.4-14.5). More than one-third of patients treated in the second-line setting remained on therapy for over one year, and three patients have stayed on amivantamab treatment for more than two years. In patients with liver metastases (n=30), the study showed notable activity, with an ORR of 57 percent (95 percent CI, 37-75) and a median PFS of 11.3 months (95 percent CI, 5.9-16.4).1

The safety profile remained consistent with prior reports of amivantamab plus chemotherapy in colorectal cancer and with the known safety profiles of the individual agents. Treatment-emergent adverse events were primarily related to EGFR and MET inhibition and known chemotherapy-associated effects. Four patients (9 percent) discontinued therapy due to treatment-related adverse events. The most common Grade 3 or higher event was neutropenia, and no new safety signals were observed.1

"Treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer has remained largely unchanged for many years, underscoring the need for new strategies," said Kiran Patel, M.D., Vice President, Global Head, Solid Tumor Clinical Development and Companion Diagnostics, Johnson & Johnson Innovative Medicine. "We are drawing on our scientific leadership in EGFR-driven lung cancer to evaluate the potential of amivantamab, and its dual-targeting of EGFR and MET, in colorectal cancer and other solid tumors driven by these pathways."  

Pivotal Phase 3 studies, including the global, randomized OrigAMI-2 and OrigAMI-3 studies evaluating subcutaneous amivantamab with FOLFOX and FOLFIRI, are underway to further evaluate the potential of amivantamab-based regimens in both first- and second-line colorectal cancer.

About the OrigAMI-1 Study

OrigAMI-1 (NCT05379595) is an open-label, Phase 1b/2 study assessing the efficacy and safety of RYBREVANT® plus mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI in anti-EGFR-naïve RAS/BRAF WT mCRC. Eligible patients were wild-type (WT) for KRAS, NRAS or BRAF genes based on circulating tumor DNA testing. Additionally, patients were required to have no amplification of the ERBB2/HER2 gene. In the RYBREVANT® and chemotherapy cohorts, patients were either treatment-naïve or had received at least one prior line in the metastatic setting (no EGFR inhibitor treatment). The primary endpoint of the combination cohorts was to characterize the safety and confirm the dose of RYBREVANT® plus mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI. Response was assessed by the investigator per RECIST v1.1.12

About Colorectal Cancer

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide, accounting for approximately 10 percent of all cancer cases, and is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide.2 While it predominantly affects older individuals, recent research suggests that colorectal cancer is now being diagnosed in adults under the age of 50 at record rates.3

Left-sided colorectal cancer, which represents approximately 65 percent of cases, often has distinct characteristics that influence treatment strategies. Around half of colorectal cancer patients have mutations in the RAS genes, with KRAS being the most common mutation. While tumors with normal RAS and BRAF genes generally respond better to EGFR inhibitors, those with RAS and BRAF mutations – particularly on the left side – are associated with poorer outcomes.13

About RYBREVANT®

RYBREVANT® (amivantamab-vmjw), a fully-human bispecific antibody targeting EGFR and MET with immune cell-directing activity, is approved in the U.S., Europe and other markets around the world as monotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test, whose disease has progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy.14

RYBREVANT® is approved in the U.S., Europe and other markets around the world in combination with chemotherapy (carboplatin and pemetrexed) for the first-line treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test.  

RYBREVANT® is approved in the U.S., Europe and other markets around the world in combination with LAZCLUZE® (lazertinib) for the first-line treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 L858R substitution mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test.

RYBREVANT® is approved in the U.S., Europe and other markets around the world in combination with chemotherapy (carboplatin-pemetrexed) for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 19 deletions or L858R substitution mutations, whose disease has progressed on or after treatment with an EGFR TKI.

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ (amivantamab and hyaluronidase-lpuj) is approved in the U.S., Europe and other markets around the world in combination with LAZCLUZE® for the first-line treatment of adult patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 L858R substitution mutations, and as a monotherapy for the treatment of adult patients with advanced NSCLC with activating EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations after failure of platinum-based therapy.

The National Comprehensive Cancer Network® (NCCN®) Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®)§15 include amivantamab-vmjw (RYBREVANT®) across multiple treatment settings, including its recent inclusion as a NCCN Category 1 preferred option when used with lazertinib (LAZCLUZE®) for first-line treatment of people with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 L858R mutations; see the latest NCCN Guidelines® for NSCLC for complete information. †‡

The NCCN Guidelines for Central Nervous System Cancers also identify amivantamab-vmjw (RYBREVANT®)-based regimens, including the combination with lazertinib (LAZCLUZE®), as the only NCCN-preferred combination options for patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC and brain metastases.†‡

In addition to the Phase 1b/2 OrigAMI-1 study, RYBREVANT® is being studied in multiple clinical trials, including: 

The Phase 3 MARIPOSA (NCT04487080) study assessing RYBREVANT® in combination with LAZCLUZE® versus osimertinib and versus LAZCLUZE® alone in the first-line treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR ex19del or substitution mutations.16 The Phase 3 MARIPOSA-2 (NCT04988295) study assessing the efficacy of RYBREVANT® (with or without LAZCLUZE®) and carboplatin-pemetrexed versus carboplatin-pemetrexed alone in patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 19 deletions or L858R substitution mutations after disease progression on or after osimertinib.17 The Phase 3 PAPILLON (NCT04538664) study assessing RYBREVANT® in combination with carboplatin-pemetrexed versus chemotherapy alone in the first-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations.18 The Phase 3 PALOMA-3 (NCT05388669) study assessing LAZCLUZE® with subcutaneous (SC) amivantamab compared to RYBREVANT® in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced or metastatic NSCLC.19 The Phase 2 PALOMA-2 (NCT05498428) study assessing SC amivantamab in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors including EGFR-mutated NSCLC.20 The Phase 1 PALOMA (NCT04606381) study assessing the feasibility of SC amivantamab based on safety and pharmacokinetics and to determine a dose, dose regimen and formulation for SC amivantamab delivery.21 The Phase 1 CHRYSALIS (NCT02609776) study evaluating RYBREVANT® in patients with advanced NSCLC.22 The Phase 1/1b CHRYSALIS-2 (NCT04077463) study evaluating RYBREVANT® in combination with LAZCLUZE® and LAZCLUZE® as a monotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC with EGFR mutations.23 The Phase 1/2 METalmark (NCT05488314) study assessing RYBREVANT® and capmatinib combination therapy in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.24 The Phase 1/2 swalloWTail (NCT06532032) study assessing RYBREVANT® and docetaxel combination therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC.25 The Phase 1/2 PolyDamas (NCT05908734) study assessing RYBREVANT® and cetrelimab combination therapy in locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC.26 The Phase 2 SKIPPirr (NCT05663866) study exploring how to decrease the incidence and/or severity of first-dose infusion-related reactions with RYBREVANT® in combination with LAZCLUZE® in relapsed or refractory EGFR-mutated advanced or metastatic NSCLC.27 The Phase 2 COPERNICUS (NCT06667076) study combining developments in treatment administration and prophylactic supportive care in representative US patients with common EGFR-mutated NSCLC treated with SC amivantamab in combination with LAZCLUZE® or chemotherapy.28 The Phase 2 COCOON (NCT06120140) study assessing the effectiveness of a proactive dermatologic management regimen given with first-line RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE® in patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC.29 The Phase 3 OrigAMI-2 (NCT06662786) study assessing subcutaneous amivantamab and mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI in patients with KRAS/NRAS and BRAF wild-type unresectable or metastatic left-sided colorectal cancer.30 The Phase 3 OrigAMI-3 (NCT06750094) study assessing subcutaneous amivantamab and FOLFIRI in patients with KRAS/NRAS and BRAF wild-type recurrent, unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer after disease progression on chemotherapy.31 The Phase 1b/2 OrigAMI-4 (NCT06385080) study assessing RYBREVANT® monotherapy and in addition to standard-of-care therapeutic agents in patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.32 The Phase 3 OrigAMI-5 (NCT07276399) study assessing SC amivantamab with pembrolizumab and carboplatin in patients with recurrent/metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.33 The legal manufacturer for RYBREVANT® is Janssen Biotech, Inc.

INDICATIONS

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ (amivantamab and hyaluronidase-lpuj) and RYBREVANT® (amivantamab-vmjw) are indicated:

in combination with LAZCLUZE® (lazertinib) for the first-line treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 L858R substitution mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test. in combination with carboplatin and pemetrexed for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 19 deletions or exon 21 L858R substitution mutations, whose disease has progressed on or after treatment with an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor. in combination with carboplatin and pemetrexed for the first-line treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations, as detected by an FDA-approved test. as a single agent for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with EGFR exon 20 insertion mutations, as detected by an FDA approved test, whose disease has progressed on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION14,34

CONTRAINDICATIONS

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ is contraindicated in patients with known hypersensitivity to hyaluronidase or to any of its excipients.

WARNINGS AND PRECAUTIONS

Hypersensitivity and Administration-Related Reactions with RYBREVANT FASPRO™

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ can cause hypersensitivity and administration-related reactions (ARR); signs and symptoms of ARR include dyspnea, flushing, fever, chills, chest discomfort, hypotension, and vomiting. The median time to ARR onset is approximately 2 hours.

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ with LAZCLUZE®

In PALOMA-3 (n=206), all Grade ARR occurred in 13% of patients, including 0.5% Grade 3. Of the patients who experienced ARR, 89% occurred with the initial dose (Week 1, Day 1).

Premedicate with antihistamines, antipyretics, and glucocorticoids and administer RYBREVANT FASPRO™ as recommended. Monitor patients for any signs and symptoms of administration-related reactions during injection in a setting where cardiopulmonary resuscitation medication and equipment are available. Interrupt RYBREVANT FASPRO™ injection if ARR is suspected. Resume treatment upon resolution of symptoms or permanently discontinue RYBREVANT FASPRO™ based on severity.

Infusion-Related Reactions with RYBREVANT®

RYBREVANT® can cause infusion-related reactions (IRR) including anaphylaxis; signs and symptoms of IRR include dyspnea, flushing, fever, chills, nausea, chest discomfort, hypotension, and vomiting. The median time to IRR onset is approximately 1 hour.

RYBREVANT® with LAZCLUZE®

In MARIPOSA (n=421), IRRs occurred in 63% of patients, including Grade 3 in 5% and Grade 4 in 1% of patients. IRR-related infusion modifications occurred in 54%, dose reduction in 0.7%, and permanent discontinuation of RYBREVANT® in 4.5% of patients.

RYBREVANT® with Carboplatin and Pemetrexed

Based on the pooled safety population (n=281), IRRs occurred in 50% of patients including Grade 3 (3.2%) adverse reactions. IRR-related infusion modifications occurred in 46%, and permanent discontinuation of RYBREVANT® in 2.8% of patients.

RYBREVANT® as a Single Agent

In CHRYSALIS (n=302), IRRs occurred in 66% of patients. IRRs occurred in 65% of patients on Week 1 Day 1, 3.4% on Day 2 infusion, 0.4% with Week 2 infusion, and were cumulatively 1.1% with subsequent infusions. 97% were Grade 1-2, 2.2% were Grade 3, and 0.4% were Grade 4. The median time to onset was 1 hour (range: 0.1 to 18 hours) after start of infusion. IRR-related infusion modifications occurred in 62%, and permanent discontinuation of RYBREVANT® in 1.3% of patients.

Premedicate with antihistamines, antipyretics, and glucocorticoids and infuse RYBREVANT® as recommended. Administer RYBREVANT® via a peripheral line on Week 1 and Week 2 to reduce the risk of IRRs. Monitor patients for signs and symptoms of IRRs in a setting where cardiopulmonary resuscitation medication and equipment are available. Interrupt infusion if IRR is suspected. Reduce the infusion rate or permanently discontinue RYBREVANT® based on severity. If an anaphylactic reaction occurs, permanently discontinue RYBREVANT®.

Interstitial Lung Disease/Pneumonitis

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ and RYBREVANT® can cause severe and fatal interstitial lung disease (ILD)/pneumonitis.

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ with LAZCLUZE®

In PALOMA-3, ILD/pneumonitis occurred in 6% of patients, including Grade 3 in 1%, Grade 4 in 1.5%, and fatal cases in 1.9% of patients. 5% of patients permanently discontinued RYBREVANT FASPRO™ and LAZCLUZE® due to ILD/pneumonitis.

RYBREVANT® with LAZCLUZE®

In MARIPOSA, ILD/pneumonitis occurred in 3.1% of patients, including Grade 3 in 1.0% and Grade 4 in 0.2% of patients. There was one fatal case of ILD/pneumonitis and 2.9% of patients permanently discontinued RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE® due to ILD/pneumonitis.

RYBREVANT® with Carboplatin and Pemetrexed

Based on the pooled safety population, ILD/pneumonitis occurred in 2.1% of patients with 1.8% of patients experiencing Grade 3 ILD/pneumonitis. 2.1% discontinued RYBREVANT® due to ILD/pneumonitis.

RYBREVANT® as a Single Agent

In CHRYSALIS, ILD/pneumonitis occurred in 3.3% of patients, with 0.7% of patients experiencing Grade 3 ILD/pneumonitis. Three patients (1%) permanently discontinued RYBREVANT® due to ILD/pneumonitis.

Monitor patients for new or worsening symptoms indicative of ILD/pneumonitis (e.g., dyspnea, cough, fever). Immediately withhold RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE® (when applicable) in patients with suspected ILD/pneumonitis and permanently discontinue if ILD/pneumonitis is confirmed.

Venous Thromboembolic (VTE) Events with Concomitant Use with LAZCLUZE®

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ and RYBREVANT® in combination with LAZCLUZE® can cause serious and fatal venous thromboembolic (VTE) events, including deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism. Without prophylactic anticoagulation, the majority of these events occurred during the first four months of treatment.

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ with LAZCLUZE®

In PALOMA-3 (n=206), all Grade VTE occurred in 11% of patients and 1.5% were Grade 3. 80% (n=164) of patients received prophylactic anticoagulation at study entry, with an all Grade VTE incidence of 7%. In patients who did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation (n=42), all Grade VTE occurred in 17% of patients. In total, 0.5% of patients had VTE leading to dose reductions of RYBREVANT FASPRO™ and no patients required permanent discontinuation. The median time to onset of VTEs was 95 days (range: 17 to 390).

RYBREVANT® with LAZCLUZE®

In MARIPOSA (n=421), VTEs occurred in 36% of patients including Grade 3 in 10% and Grade 4 in 0.5% of patients. On-study VTEs occurred in 1.2% of patients (n=5) while receiving anticoagulation therapy. There were two fatal cases of VTE (0.5%), 9% of patients had VTE leading to dose interruptions of RYBREVANT®, and 7% of patients had VTE leading to dose interruptions of LAZCLUZE®; 1% of patients had VTE leading to dose reductions of RYBREVANT®, and 0.5% of patients had VTE leading to dose reductions of LAZCLUZE®; 3.1% of patients had VTE leading to permanent discontinuation of RYBREVANT®, and 1.9% of patients had VTE leading to permanent discontinuation of LAZCLUZE®. The median time to onset of VTEs was 84 days (range: 6 to 777).

Administer prophylactic anticoagulation for the first four months of treatment. The use of Vitamin K antagonists is not recommended.

Monitor for signs and symptoms of VTE events and treat as medically appropriate. Withhold RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE® based on severity. Once anticoagulant treatment has been initiated, resume RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE® at the same dose level at the discretion of the healthcare provider. In the event of VTE recurrence despite therapeutic anticoagulation, permanently discontinue RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT®. Treatment can continue with LAZCLUZE® at the same dose level at the discretion of the healthcare provider. Refer to the LAZCLUZE® Prescribing Information for recommended LAZCLUZE® dosage modification.

Dermatologic Adverse Reactions

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ and RYBREVANT® can cause severe rash including toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), dermatitis acneiform, pruritus and dry skin.

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ with LAZCLUZE®

In PALOMA-3, rash occurred in 80% of patients, including Grade 3 in 17% and Grade 4 in 0.5% of patients. Rash leading to dose reduction occurred in 11% of patients, and RYBREVANT FASPRO™ was permanently discontinued due to rash in 1.5% of patients.

RYBREVANT® with LAZCLUZE®

In MARIPOSA, rash occurred in 86% of patients, including Grade 3 in 26% of patients. The median time to onset of rash was 14 days (range: 1 to 556 days). Rash leading to dose interruptions occurred in 37% of patients for RYBREVANT® and 30% for LAZCLUZE®, rash leading to dose reductions occurred in 23% of patients for RYBREVANT® and 19% for LAZCLUZE®, and rash leading to permanent discontinuation occurred in 5% of patients for RYBREVANT® and 1.7% for LAZCLUZE®.

RYBREVANT® with Carboplatin and Pemetrexed

Based on the pooled safety population, rash occurred in 82% of patients, including Grade 3 (15%) adverse reactions. Rash leading to dose reductions occurred in 14% of patients, and 2.5% permanently discontinued RYBREVANT® and 3.1% discontinued pemetrexed.

RYBREVANT® as a Single Agent

In CHRYSALIS, rash occurred in 74% of patients, including Grade 3 in 3.3% of patients. The median time to onset of rash was 14 days (range: 1 to 276 days). Rash leading to dose reduction occurred in 5% and permanent discontinuation due to rash occurred in 0.7% of patients. Toxic epidermal necrolysis occurred in one patient (0.3%).

When initiating treatment with RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE®, prophylactic and concomitant medications are recommended to reduce the risk and severity of dermatologic adverse reactions. Instruct patients to limit sun exposure during and for 2 months after treatment. Advise patients to wear protective clothing and use broad spectrum UVA/UVB sunscreen.

If skin reactions develop, administer supportive care including topical corticosteroids and topical and/or oral antibiotics. For Grade 3 reactions, add oral steroids and consider dermatologic consultation. Promptly refer patients presenting with severe rash, atypical appearance or distribution, or lack of improvement within 2 weeks to a dermatologist. For patients receiving RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® in combination with LAZCLUZE®, withhold, reduce the dose, or permanently discontinue both drugs based on severity. For patients receiving RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® as a single agent or in combination with carboplatin and pemetrexed, withhold, dose reduce or permanently discontinue RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® based on severity.

Ocular Toxicity

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ and RYBREVANT® can cause ocular toxicity including keratitis, blepharitis, dry eye symptoms, conjunctival redness, blurred vision, visual impairment, ocular itching, eye pruritus and uveitis.

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ with LAZCLUZE®

In PALOMA-3, all Grade ocular toxicity occurred in 13% of patients, including 0.5% Grade 3.

RYBREVANT® with LAZCLUZE®

In MARIPOSA, ocular toxicity occurred in 16%, including Grade 3 or 4 ocular toxicity in 0.7% of patients.

RYBREVANT® with Carboplatin and Pemetrexed

Based on the pooled safety population, ocular toxicity occurred in 16% of patients. All events were Grade 1 or 2.

RYBREVANT® as a Single Agent

In CHRYSALIS, keratitis occurred in 0.7% and uveitis occurred in 0.3% of patients. All events were Grade 1-2.

Promptly refer patients presenting with new or worsening eye symptoms to an ophthalmologist. Withhold, dose reduce or permanently discontinue RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT® and continue LAZCLUZE® based on severity.

Embryo-Fetal Toxicity

Based on animal models, RYBREVANT FASPRO™, RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE® can cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant woman. Verify pregnancy status of females of reproductive potential prior to initiating RYBREVANT FASPRO™ and RYBREVANT®. Advise pregnant women and females of reproductive potential of the potential risk to the fetus. Advise patients of reproductive potential to use effective contraception during treatment and for 3 months after the last dose of RYBREVANT FASPRO™ or RYBREVANT®, and for 3 weeks after the last dose of LAZCLUZE®.

ADVERSE REACTIONS

RYBREVANT FASPRO™ with LAZCLUZE®

In PALOMA-3 (n=206), the most common adverse reactions (≥20%) were rash (80%), nail toxicity (58%), musculoskeletal pain (50%), fatigue (37%), stomatitis (36%), edema (34%), nausea (30%), diarrhea (22%), vomiting (22%), constipation (22%), decreased appetite (22%), and headache (21%). The most common Grade 3 or 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥2%) were decreased lymphocyte count (6%), decreased sodium (5%), decreased potassium (5%), decreased albumin (4.9%), increased alanine aminotransferase (3.4%), decreased platelet count (2.4%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (2%), increased gamma-glutamyl transferase (2%), and decreased hemoglobin (2%).

Serious adverse reactions occurred in 33% of patients, with those occurring in ≥2% of patients including ILD/pneumonitis (6%); and pneumonia, VTE and fatigue (2.4% each). Death due to adverse reactions occurred in 5% of patients treated with RYBREVANT FASPRO™, including ILD/pneumonitis (1.9%), pneumonia (1.5%), and respiratory failure and sudden death (1% each).

RYBREVANT® with LAZCLUZE®

In MARIPOSA (n=421), the most common adverse reactions (ARs) (≥20%) were rash (86%), nail toxicity (71%), infusion-related reactions (IRRs) (RYBREVANT®) (63%), musculoskeletal pain (47%), stomatitis (43%), edema (43%), VTE (36%), paresthesia (35%), fatigue (32%), diarrhea (31%), constipation (29%), COVID-19 (26%), hemorrhage (25%), dry skin (25%), decreased appetite (24%), pruritus (24%), and nausea (21%). The most common Grade 3 or 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥2%) were decreased albumin (8%), decreased sodium (7%), increased ALT (7%), decreased potassium (5%), decreased hemoglobin (3.8%), increased AST (3.8%), increased GGT (2.6%), and increased magnesium (2.6%).

Serious ARs occurred in 49% of patients, with those occurring in ≥2% of patients including VTE (11%), pneumonia (4%), ILD/pneumonitis and rash (2.9% each), COVID-19 (2.4%), and pleural effusion and IRRs (RYBREVANT®) (2.1% each). Fatal ARs occurred in 7% of patients due to death not otherwise specified (1.2%); sepsis and respiratory failure (1% each); pneumonia, myocardial infarction, and sudden death (0.7% each); cerebral infarction, pulmonary embolism (PE), and COVID-19 infection (0.5% each); and ILD/pneumonitis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and cardiopulmonary arrest (0.2% each).

RYBREVANT® with Carboplatin and Pemetrexed

In MARIPOSA-2 (n=130), the most common ARs (≥20%) were rash (72%), IRRs (59%), fatigue (51%), nail toxicity (45%), nausea (45%), constipation (39%), edema (36%), stomatitis (35%), decreased appetite (31%), musculoskeletal pain (30%), vomiting (25%), and COVID-19 (21%). The most common Grade 3 to 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥2%) were decreased neutrophils (49%), decreased white blood cells (42%), decreased lymphocytes (28%), decreased platelets (17%), decreased hemoglobin (12%), decreased potassium (11%), decreased sodium (11%), increased alanine aminotransferase (3.9%), decreased albumin (3.8%), and increased gamma-glutamyl transferase (3.1%).

In MARIPOSA-2, serious ARs occurred in 32% of patients, with those occurring in >2% of patients including dyspnea (3.1%), thrombocytopenia (3.1%), sepsis (2.3%), and PE (2.3%). Fatal ARs occurred in 2.3% of patients; these included respiratory failure, sepsis, and ventricular fibrillation (0.8% each).

In PAPILLON (n=151), the most common ARs (≥20%) were rash (90%), nail toxicity (62%), stomatitis (43%), IRRs (42%), fatigue (42%), edema (40%), constipation (40%), decreased appetite (36%), nausea (36%), COVID-19 (24%), diarrhea (21%), and vomiting (21%). The most common Grade 3 to 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥2%) were decreased albumin (7%), increased alanine aminotransferase (4%), increased gamma-glutamyl transferase (4%), decreased sodium (7%), decreased potassium (11%), decreased magnesium (2%), and decreases in white blood cells (17%), hemoglobin (11%), neutrophils (36%), platelets (10%), and lymphocytes (11%).

In PAPILLON, serious ARs occurred in 37% of patients, with those occurring in ≥2% of patients including rash, pneumonia, ILD, PE, vomiting, and COVID-19. Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 7 patients (4.6%) due to pneumonia, cerebrovascular accident, cardio-respiratory arrest, COVID-19, sepsis, and death not otherwise specified.

RYBREVANT® as a Single Agent

In CHRYSALIS (n=129), the most common ARs (≥20%) were rash (84%), IRR (64%), paronychia (50%), musculoskeletal pain (47%), dyspnea (37%), nausea (36%), fatigue (33%), edema (27%), stomatitis (26%), cough (25%), constipation (23%), and vomiting (22%). The most common Grade 3 to 4 laboratory abnormalities (≥2%) were decreased lymphocytes (8%), decreased albumin (8%), decreased phosphate (8%), decreased potassium (6%), increased alkaline phosphatase (4.8%), increased glucose (4%), increased gamma-glutamyl transferase (4%), and decreased sodium (4%).

Serious ARs occurred in 30% of patients, with those occurring in ≥2% of patients including PE, pneumonitis/ILD, dyspnea, musculoskeletal pain, pneumonia, and muscular weakness. Fatal adverse reactions occurred in 2 patients (1.5%) due to pneumonia and 1 patient (0.8%) due to sudden death.

LAZCLUZE® DRUG INTERACTIONS

Avoid concomitant use of LAZCLUZE® with strong and moderate CYP3A4 inducers. Consider an alternate concomitant medication with no potential to induce CYP3A4.

Monitor for adverse reactions associated with a CYP3A4 or BCRP substrate where minimal concentration changes may lead to serious adverse reactions, as recommended in the approved product labeling for the CYP3A4 or BCRP substrate.

Please see full Prescribing Information for RYBREVANT FASPRO™, RYBREVANT® and LAZCLUZE®.

cp-491009v1

About Johnson & Johnson

At Johnson & Johnson, we believe health is everything. Our strength in healthcare innovation empowers us to build a world where complex diseases are prevented, treated, and cured, where treatments are smarter and less invasive, and solutions are personal. Through our expertise in Innovative Medicine and MedTech, we are uniquely positioned to innovate across the full spectrum of healthcare solutions today to deliver the breakthroughs of tomorrow and profoundly impact health for humanity. Learn more at https://www.jnj.com/ or at www.innovativemedicine.jnj.com. Follow us at @JNJInnovMed.

Cautions Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains "forward-looking statements" as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 regarding product development and the potential benefits and treatment impact of RYBREVANT® (amivantamab-vmjw). The reader is cautioned not to rely on these forward-looking statements. These statements are based on current expectations of future events. If underlying assumptions prove inaccurate or known or unknown risks or uncertainties materialize, actual results could vary materially from the expectations and projections of Johnson & Johnson. Risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: challenges and uncertainties inherent in product research and development, including the uncertainty of clinical success and of obtaining regulatory approvals; uncertainty of commercial success; manufacturing difficulties and delays; competition, including technological advances, new products and patents attained by competitors; challenges to patents; product efficacy or safety concerns resulting in product recalls or regulatory action; changes in behavior and spending patterns of purchasers of health care products and services; changes to applicable laws and regulations, including global health care reforms; and trends toward health care cost containment. A further list and descriptions of these risks, uncertainties and other factors can be found in Johnson & Johnson's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, including in the sections captioned "Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements" and "Item 1A. Risk Factors," and in Johnson & Johnson's subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Copies of these filings are available online at http://www.sec.gov, http://www.jnj.com, or on request from Johnson & Johnson. Johnson & Johnson does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement as a result of new information or future events or developments.

*Dr. Filippo Pietrantonio, M.D. has served as a consultant to Johnson & Johnson; he has not been paid for any media work. 

§The NCCN Content does not constitute medical advice and should not be used in place of seeking professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment by licensed practitioners. NCCN makes no warranties of any kind whatsoever regarding their content, use or application and disclaims any responsibility for their application or use in any way.

†See the NCCN Guidelines for detailed recommendations, including other treatment options.

‡The NCCN Guidelines for NSCLC provide recommendations for certain individual biomarkers that should be tested and recommend testing techniques but do not endorse any specific commercially available biomarker assays or commercial laboratories.

1 Chen E, et al. Amivantamab plus FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in RAS/BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: Long-term follow-up from the phase 1b/2 OrigAMI-1 study. Presented at: 2026 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium; January 10, 2026; San Franscico, California.
2 Cervantes A, Adams R, et al. Metastatic colorectal cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2023;34(1):10-32. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2022.10.003
3 Virostko J, et al. Recent trends in the age at diagnosis of colorectal cancer in the US National Cancer Data Base, 2004-2015. Cancer. 2019;125:3828-3835. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.32347
4 Patel RK, Rahman S, Schwantes IR, et al. Updated management of colorectal cancer liver metastases: scientific advances driving modern therapeutic innovations. Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2023;16(6):881-894. doi:10.1016/j.jcmgh.2023.08.012
5 Grothey A, Lenz HJ. Exploring new treatments for advanced colorectal cancer: current standards and future directions. Cancer Treat Rev. 2020;86:102017. doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2020.102017
6 Kumar A, Gautam V, et al. Current and emerging therapeutic approaches for colorectal cancer: A comprehensive review. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2023;15(4):495-519. doi:10.4240/wjgs.v15.i4.495
7 Iwamoto S, Hazama S, Kato T, et al. Multicenter phase II study of second-line cetuximab plus folinic acid/5-fluorouracil/irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: the FLIER study. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(4):1967-1973.
8 Peeters M, Price TJ, Cervantes A, et al. Final results from a randomized phase 3 study of FOLFIRI {+/-} panitumumab for second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(1):107-116. doi:10.1093/annonc/mdt523
9 Santini A, Lenz HJ, Eng C, et al. Extended RAS analysis of the phase III EPIC trial: irinotecan plus cetuximab versus irinotecan as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Oncologist. 2021;26(2):e261-e269. doi:10.1002/onco.13591
10 Peeters M, Oliner KS, Price TJ, et al. Analysis of KRAS/NRAS Mutations in a Phase III Study of Panitumumab with FOLFIRI Compared with FOLFIRI Alone as Second-line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2015;21(24):5469-5479. doi:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0526
11 Feldt SL, Bestvina CM. The Role of MET in Resistance to EGFR Inhibition in NSCLC: A Review of Mechanisms and Treatment Implications. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15(11):2998. doi:10.3390/cancers15112998
12 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab Monotherapy and in Addition to Standard-of-Care Chemotherapy in Participants With Advanced or Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (OrigAMI-1). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05379595?tab=history&a=1. Accessed January 2026.
13 Lieu CH, et al. Integrating biomarkers and targeted therapy into colorectal cancer management. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2019;39:207-215. doi:10.1200/EDBK_240839
14 RYBREVANT® Prescribing Information. Horsham, PA: Janssen Biotech, Inc.
15 Referenced with permission from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer V.3.2026 © National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc. All rights reserved. To view the most recent and complete version of the guideline, go online to NCCN.org. Accessed January 2026.
16 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab and Lazertinib Combination Therapy Versus Osimertinib in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (MARIPOSA). https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04487080. Accessed January 2026.
17 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab and LAZCLUZE® in Combination With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy Compared With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy in Patients With Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer After Osimertinib Failure (MARIPOSA-2). Available at: https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT04988295. Accessed January 2026. 
18 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Combination Amivantamab and Carboplatin-Pemetrexed Therapy, Compared With Carboplatin-Pemetrexed, in Participants With Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Characterized by Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) Exon 20 Insertions (PAPILLON). Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04538664. Accessed January 2026.
19 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of LAZCLUZE® With Subcutaneous Amivantamab Compared With Intravenous Amivantamab in Participants With Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutated Advanced or Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (PALOMA 3). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05388669. Accessed January 2026.
20 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab in Participants With Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors Including Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (PALOMA-2). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05498428. Accessed January 2026.
21 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab Subcutaneous (SC) Administration for the Treatment of Advanced Solid Malignancies (PALOMA). Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04606381. Accessed January 2026.
22 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab, a Human Bispecific EGFR and cMet Antibody, in Participants With Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (CHRYSALIS). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02609776. Accessed January 2026.
23 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of LAZCLUZE® as Monotherapy or in Combination With Amivantamab in Participants With Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (CHRYSALIS-2). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04077463. Accessed January 2026.
24 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab and Capmatinib Combination Therapy in Unresectable Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (METalmark). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05488314. Accessed January 2026.
25 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Combination Therapy With Amivantamab and Docetaxel in Participants With Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (swalloWTail). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06532032. Accessed January 2026.
26 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Combination Therapy With Amivantamab and Cetrelimab in Participants With Metastatic Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (PolyDamas). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05908734. Accessed January 2026.
27 ClinicalTrials.gov. Premedication to Reduce Amivantamab Associated Infusion Related Reactions (SKIPPirr). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05663866. Accessed January 2026.
28 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab in Combination With Lazertinib, or Amivantamab in Combination With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy, for Common Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-Mutated Locally Advanced or Metastatic Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) (COPERNICUS). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06667076. Accessed January 2026.
29 ClinicalTrials.gov. Enhanced Dermatological Care to Reduce Rash and Paronychia in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGRF)-Mutated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Treated First-line With Amivantamab Plus Lazertinib (COCOON). https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06120140. Accessed January 2026.
30 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab and mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI Versus Cetuximab and mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI as First-line Treatment in Participants With KRAS/ NRAS and BRAF Wild-type Unresectable or Metastatic Left-sided Colorectal Cancer (OrigAMI-2). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06662786. Accessed January 2026.
31 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab and FOLFIRI Versus Cetuximab/ Bevacizumab and FOLFIRI in Participants With KRAS/ NRAS and BRAF Wild-type Colorectal Cancer Who Have Previously Received Chemotherapy (OrigAMI-3). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06750094. Accessed January 2026.
32 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab Alone or in Addition to Other Treatment Agents in Participants With Recurrent/ Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer (OrigAMI-4). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06385080. Accessed January 2026.
33 ClinicalTrials.gov. A Study of Amivantamab in Addition to Standard of Care Agents (SOC) Compared With SOC Alone in Participants With Recurrent/ Metastatic Head and Neck Cancer (OrigAMI-5). https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT07276399. Accessed January 2026.
34 LAZCLUZE® Prescribing Information. Horsham, PA: Janssen Biotech, Inc.

SOURCE Johnson & Johnson

watch now

BlackRock came into 2026 with a clear investment plan built around three pillars: artificial intelligence, income, and diversification.

Jay Jacobs, BlackRock's head of equity exchange-traded funds, laid out ways in which ETFs fit into the shifting market bets from the world's largest asset manager, which oversees more than $13 trillion from investors. Investors should remain focused on growth, he says, but precision will matter more than broad exposure.

"The first is really what are the biggest growth opportunities in the market today," Jacobs said on CNBC's "ETF Edge" on Monday. "Where you have to get laser focused to try and find some of these targeted exposures, like artificial intelligence, that could do very well in this environment."

That and the other investing themes Jacobs shared on "ETF Edge" are consistent with BlackRock's 2026 annual outlook, "AI, income & diversifiers," which was released earlier this week.

BlackRock continues to view AI as a long-term, capital intensive investment cycle. Infrastructure spending remains elevated, while productivity gains and earnings growth are backed by AI-related investments. The firm does not see the theme as nearing exhaustion.

BlackRock is among the ETF companies offering AI-focused funds, such as its iShares A.I. Innovation and Tech Active ETF (BAI), which has amassed over $8 billion in assets.

BAI 1Y

There are many other AI ETF options that have grown to over $1 billion in assets in recent years:

Roundhill Generative AI & Technology ETF (CHAT)Ark Autonomous Technology and Robotics ETF (ARKQ)Global X Robotics and Artificial Intelligence ETF (BOTZ)Global X Artificial Intelligence and Technology ETF (AIQ)iShares Future AI & Tech ETF (ARTY)Dan Ives Wedbush AI Revolution ETF (IVES)Jacobs cited the U.S. equity market's high level of concentration, with a handful of mega-cap tech stocks now accounting for an outsized share of returns, as among the reasons to fine-tune equities exposure. The "Magnificent Seven" stocks make up over 40% of the S&P 500 Index.

"[That concentration] is either a feature or a bug," Jacobs said. "It's reaching historical levels."

Jacobs said investors are responding by becoming more deliberate about how much concentration they want. Some are choosing to broaden their exposure by equal-weighting the U.S. stock market as a way to manage the risk.

Jacobs cited the interest-rate environment, and expectations the Federal Reserve will lower rates again, as a reason to make income a major focus this year as the declining rates pressure yields on cash investments. Investors who relied on money markets for income may need to reposition. "We are in a falling interest rate environment. We expect some cuts this year. We need to find new sources of income to diversify your portfolio and generate income from it," Jacobs said.

Diversification is the third pillar of BlackRock's 2026 approach to the market. Bouts of volatility are becoming more frequent while market leadership is narrow, and traditional portfolio design that rely on bonds to smooth out the risks from stocks — typically the so-called 60-40 portfolio — are proving less reliable during periods of stress. As a result, Jacobs said investors are looking for assets that behave differently. "Where can you really get diversification for your portfolio?" he said. "Something that's going to behave differently from stocks and bonds."

The underlying message from Jacobs was that investors have been very fortunate over the past decade with a U.S. stock market that has produced significant returns, but it would be risky to expect that run to continue at a similar pace. "The last 10 years, the S&P 500 has an annualized return of 13.5%, and many expect it to be lower," he said.

If you are looking to invest in stocks, Wall Street legend Warren Buffett suggests the S&P 500 index.

Warren Buffett earned the nickname the Oracle of Omaha because of his investment track record. He has recently stepped down as the CEO of his investment vehicle, Berkshire Hathaway, but that doesn't change the value of the remarkably successful investor's advice.

Buffett's advice? Most investors should just buy the S&P 500 index (^GSPC +0.65%) and hold forever. Two options for achieving this are Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO +0.67%) and Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF (RSP +0.58%). Here's what you need to know.

Why the S&P 500 index? The key fact to understand about the S&P 500 index is that it isn't actually meant to track the stock market. The actual purpose of the index is to track the U.S. economy. The hand-selected list of approximately 500 stocks comprises large and economically significant U.S. businesses spanning all major industries. The reason Buffett likes the S&P 500 index so much is that it grows along with the U.S. economy, which has a long history of steady expansion behind it.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

There are some nuances to understand. For starters, the stocks are selected by a committee. So there is material human influence on and oversight of the index. The companies are not selected because they are performing well, per se, but because they are large and economically important. That fact, combined with the purposeful inclusion of various business sectors, means there will always be a mix of strongly performing and underperforming stocks in the index.

The most important nuance, however, is that the index is market-cap weighted. That means the largest companies will have the greatest impact on the S&P 500's performance. This is both a positive and a negative. On the positive side, a small number of strongly performing stocks can lead the index higher. On the negative side, a small number of poorly performing stocks can cause the index to decline. Which is why you should consider two S&P 500 index alternatives before making a final decision.

Today's Change

(

0.67

%) $

4.25

Current Price

$

638.31

Understand the S&P version you buy Any investment that fully tracks the S&P 500 index is doing the same exact job. Because of this, investors should focus on the costs and benefits of the specific investment asset. Exchange-traded funds have very low costs and can be traded throughout the day, which gives them an edge over mutual funds that can only be traded at the end of the day. As for the costs, Vanguard S&P 500 ETF's 0.03% expense ratio is as close to free as you are likely to find on Wall Street.

If you have a particular interest in nostalgia, you could invest in SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY +0.66%). It is the oldest exchange-traded fund in existence. However, the 0.09% expense ratio, while low on an absolute level, is three times higher than the expense ratio of Vanguard S&P 500 ETF. For most investors, the better option will be the Vanguard ETF.

However, some investors might look at the S&P 500's market cap weighting methodology and hit the pause button today. That's because a small number of large technology-related companies are dominating the index's performance. Technology currently makes up roughly 35% of the index, more than twice the weighting of the next largest sector, which is financials. That's a massive concentration in one sector, but that is what you sometimes get with market cap weighting.

Data by YCharts.

Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF provides an alternative. Instead of market cap weighting, this ETF uses an equal weighting methodology, so every company has the same impact on overall performance. As the chart above shows, Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF has basically performed in line with the S&P 500 over the long term. You aren't giving up performance to gain access to what ultimately becomes a more balanced weighting approach.

To put a number on that, technology is the third-largest sector in the Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF. It accounts for 13.5% of assets, trailing industrials at nearly 16% and financials at roughly 15%. Healthcare is the fourth-largest sector at roughly 12%. There is materially more balance in the portfolio, for those who care about diversification.

Today's Change

(

0.58

%) $

1.14

Current Price

$

197.60

The trade-off is that Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF has a notably higher expense ratio of 0.20%. However, given the extra work being performed to reweight the holdings in the index, that is probably a worthwhile cost.

Another side effect of the different weighting method is that Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF's dividend yield is slightly higher at 1.6%, compared to Vanguard S&P 500 ETF's super tiny 1.1%. That yield difference likely won't be the deciding factor, but it is still worth knowing about.

Two S&P 500 index options Most brokers will allow you to buy fractional shares of ETFs, so $100 will let you buy $100 of either of these ETFs. They both cost well more than $100, with Invesco S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF trading near $200 per share and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF just under $650. If you can't buy fractional shares with your broker, Buffett would probably tell you to keep saving money until you can afford a single share of your chosen S&P 500 variant. And then hold forever, continuing to add money to the S&P 500 every chance you get.

Current market-cap weighted index valuations mirror the 1999 peak, where the largest companies eventually bore the brunt of the subsequent crash. Small- and mid-cap stocks are trading at their deepest discounts relative to large-caps in over 20 years, offering a much higher "margin of safety." While broad market investors chase paper gains in overvalued tech, the Income Method focuses on securing actual cash flow every month to fund your lifestyle.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

© metamorworks / Getty Images

After years of delays, autonomous vehicles are shifting from pilot programs to commercial reality. At CES 2026, NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) unveiled partnerships with Mercedes-Benz (OTC:MBGAF) for city-street autonomy and a robotaxi alliance with Lucid (NASDAQ:LCID) and Uber (NYSE:UBER). Waymo plans to expand to 12 new cities this year while targeting over one million weekly rides. iShares Self-Driving EV and Tech ETF (NYSEARCA:IDRV) offers exposure to the entire value chain at a modest valuation.

The Full Stack Play on Self-Driving Technology The iShares Self-Driving EV and Tech ETF holds $168 million in assets and tracks companies across the autonomous vehicle ecosystem. IDRV spreads exposure across automakers (Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) at 4.7%, Rivian (NASDAQ:RIVN) at 3.9%), battery suppliers (LG Energy Solution (KRX:373220) at 3.9%, LG Chem (KRX:051910) at 3.9%), materials producers (Albemarle (NYSE:ALB) at 3.8%), and emerging autonomy players (Aurora Innovation (NASDAQ:AUR) at 2.2%). The fund trades at a P/E ratio around 13, cheap for a technology ETF in a sector reaching commercialization.

This diversification matters because the autonomous vehicle winner isn’t obvious. Tesla leads in consumer vehicles with Full Self-Driving software, Waymo dominates robotaxis with over 100 million autonomous miles driven, and Chinese manufacturers like BYD (OTC:BYDDF) (3.9% of IDRV) are scaling production rapidly. IDRV captures all approaches while limiting single-company risk through equal-weight methodology where the top holding represents just 4.7% of assets.

This infographic details the IDRV ETF, outlining its full value chain exposure to self-driving and EV technology, alongside its key pros and cons for long-term patient growth investors. Performance Shows Sector Momentum Building IDRV returned 32% over the past year, crushing the S&P 500’s 18% gain by 14 percentage points and beating the Nasdaq-100’s 22% return by 10 percentage points. The fund is up 3% year-to-date in 2026. Rivian, one of IDRV’s holdings, surged 44% over the past year and gained 14% in just the last month.

The fund’s 0.48% expense ratio is competitive for a thematic ETF, though the small asset base creates liquidity considerations. Average daily volume remains light, so larger positions may experience wider bid-ask spreads.

The Tradeoffs: Small Size and Concentration Risk IDRV’s biggest weakness is its size. At $168 million in assets, the fund is tiny compared to Global X Autonomous & Electric Vehicles ETF (DRIV), which holds $340 million. Smaller funds face higher operational costs and vulnerability to redemptions during market stress. The 51% portfolio turnover suggests frequent rebalancing, which can generate tax consequences in taxable accounts.

The fund carries significant China exposure through BYD, NIO (NYSE:NIO), and XPeng (NYSE:XPEV), which combine for roughly 11% of holdings. If U.S. tariffs on Chinese EVs intensify or trade tensions escalate, these positions could underperform sharply. The equal-weight approach means it doesn’t benefit as much from a single breakout winner compared to market-cap-weighted alternatives.

Who Should Avoid This ETF Conservative investors seeking income should look elsewhere. IDRV’s 0.95% dividend yield barely covers inflation, and the fund focuses on growth companies where capital appreciation drives returns, not distributions. Retirees needing stable cash flow would be better served by dividend-focused equity funds or bond ladders.

Short-term traders face challenges. The fund’s low liquidity and thematic focus create volatility that punishes investors without a multi-year time horizon. Commercial rollouts are accelerating, but widespread consumer adoption remains years away.

Consider DRIV for Greater Scale and Track Record The Global X Autonomous & Electric Vehicles ETF (NYSEARCA:DRIV) offers a comparable strategy with $340 million in assets, double IDRV’s size. DRIV outperformed IDRV over the past five years with a 41% gain versus IDRV’s flat performance, though the gap has narrowed recently with both funds up around 32-36% over the past year. DRIV allocates 29% to information technology versus 24% to consumer discretionary, emphasizing semiconductor and software advantage of U.S. companies over Chinese volume manufacturers.

The tradeoff is cost. DRIV charges 0.68% annually compared to IDRV’s 0.47%, a 21 basis point difference that compounds over time. DRIV holds less Chinese exposure, which could be an advantage if trade tensions persist but might miss upside if Chinese EV makers continue gaining global market share.

IDRV captures the autonomous vehicle theme at an early commercial stage with diversified exposure and modest valuation, but its small size and China exposure create risks that patient, growth-oriented investors must accept.

Released: The Ultimate Guide To Retirement Income (sponsor) Most investors spend years learning how to pick good stocks and funds. Far fewer have a clear plan for turning those investments into a reliable retirement paycheck. The truth is, the transition from “building wealth” to “living on wealth” is one of the most overlooked risks facing successful investors in their 50s, 60s and 70s.

That is exactly what The Definitive Guide to Retirement Income was created to solve. It’s a free guide that outlines the straightforward math and strategies you need to convert your investments to income. Learn more here.

Disclosure: The opinions, analyses, and evaluations here are ours and not provided by any bank, financial institution, or any other company. They have not reviewed, approved or endorsed our content.

RADNOR, Pa., Jan. 10, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The law firm of Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP (www.ktmc.com) informs investors that a securities class action lawsuit has been filed against StubHub Holdings, Inc. (“StubHub”) (NYSE: STUB) on behalf of those who purchased or otherwise acquired StubHub common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement and prospectus (collectively, the “Offering Documents”) issued in connection with StubHub’s September 2025 initial public offering. The lead plaintiff deadline is January 23, 2026.

CONTACT KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP:
If you suffered StubHub losses, contact KTMC at: https://www.ktmc.com/new-cases/stubhub-holdings-inc?utm_source=Globe&mktm=PR

You can also contact attorney Jonathan Naji, Esq. by calling (484) 270-1453 or by email at [email protected].

DEFENDANTS’ ALLEGED MISCONDUCT:
The complaint alleges that, in the Offering Documents, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) StubHub was experiencing changes in the timing of payments to vendors; (2) those changes had a significant adverse impact on StubHub’s free cash flow, including trailing 12 months free cash flow; (3) as a result, StubHub’s free cash flow reports were materially misleading; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ positive statements about the company’s business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

YouTube Video: https://youtube.com/shorts/OdXl5OZsZXE?feature=share

THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS:
StubHub investors may, no later than January 23, 2026, seek to be appointed as a lead plaintiff representative of the class through Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP or other counsel, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of all class members in directing the litigation.  The lead plaintiff is usually the investor or small group of investors who have the largest financial interest and who are also adequate and typical of the proposed class of investors. The lead plaintiff selects counsel to represent the lead plaintiff and the class and these attorneys, if approved by the court, are lead or class counsel. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision of whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff.

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP encourages StubHub investors who have suffered significant losses to contact the firm directly to acquire more information.

SIGN UP FOR THE STUBHUB CASE AT: https://www.ktmc.com/new-cases/stubhub-holdings-inc?utm_source=Globe&mktm=PR

ABOUT KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP:

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP (KTMC) is a leading U.S. plaintiff-side law firm focused on securities-fraud class actions and global investor protection. The firm represents individual investors as well as institutions, such as major pension funds, asset managers, and international investors. KTMC has led some of the largest recoveries in securities litigation and has been recognized by peers and the legal media with numerous accolades, including The National Law Journal’s Plaintiff’s Hot List and Trailblazers in Plaintiffs' Law, BTI Consulting Group’s Honor Roll of Most Feared Law Firms, The Legal Intelligencer’s Class Action Firm of the Year, Lawdragon’s Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers, and Law360’s Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar. The firm operates globally with offices in Pennsylvania and California. For more information about Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP, please visit www.ktmc.com.

CONTACT:

Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
Jonathan Naji, Esq.
(484) 270-1453
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
[email protected]

May be considered attorney advertising in certain jurisdictions. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

Energy stocks delivered mixed results in 2025. As 2026 begins, several names stand out for their analyst upside targets, operational momentum, and improving fundamentals. The following five stocks offer compelling cases for significant appreciation based on current valuations, growth trajectories, and sector positioning.

5. Weatherford International Leads With Momentum and Margin Expansion Weatherford International (NASDAQ:WFRD) enters 2026 up 14% year-to-date. The oilfield services provider trades at $89.24 with a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 15x and a 1.4% dividend yield.

Third-quarter 2025 results demonstrated resilience despite industry headwinds. CEO Girish Saligram noted Weatherford “delivered across the board” while strengthening its financial foundation through credit facility expansion and debt refinancing at improved terms. The company has achieved a 1,490% gain over five years, recovering from $5.61 to current levels.

Recent momentum remains strong, with the stock up 10% over the past week and 11% over the past month. While analyst targets of $81.90 sit below the current price, operational improvements and balance sheet strength position Weatherford for continued growth as offshore drilling activity recovers.

4. Diamondback Energy Delivers Massive Free Cash Flow Diamondback Energy (NASDAQ:FANG) generated $1.76 billion in free cash flow during Q3 2025, returning $892 million to shareholders through dividends and buybacks. The Permian Basin producer trades at $147.95 with a price-to-earnings ratio of 10x and a 2.71% dividend yield.

Third-quarter revenue reached $3.92 billion, beating estimates by 9%, while earnings per share of $3.51 exceeded expectations by 18%. The company maintains a 28.7% profit margin and increased its share repurchase authorization by $2 billion to $8 billion total. Diamondback repurchased 4.29 million shares for $603 million in Q3.

Analyst targets of $179.13 represent 22% upside, supported by 8 Strong Buy and 21 Buy ratings. The company raised full-year oil production guidance to 495,000 to 498,000 barrels per day while narrowing capital expenditure forecasts. Despite a 15% decline over the past year, the stock has more than doubled over five years.

3. EQT Corporation Offers Growth at a Discount EQT Corporation (NYSE:EQT) stands out with a price-to-earnings-to-growth ratio of 0.46, indicating significant value relative to its growth rate. The leading natural gas producer in the Marcellus and Utica shales trades at $51.37 with a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 12x.

Third-quarter revenue jumped 51% year-over-year to $1.82 billion, reflecting strong natural gas demand and improved pricing. The company has tripled over five years, rising from $15.22 to current levels. Analyst targets of $64.57 represent 27% upside, with 3 Strong Buy and 17 Buy ratings.

The stock faces near-term pressure, down 8% over the past month and 4% year-to-date. However, this weakness creates an entry point for investors seeking natural gas exposure as LNG export capacity expands and domestic demand grows. The combination of low valuation multiples and strong revenue growth positions EQT for significant appreciation if natural gas prices stabilize.

2. Devon Energy Beats Earnings While Cutting Costs Devon Energy (NYSE:DVN) delivered third-quarter earnings per share of $1.04, beating estimates by 11%, while generating $1.7 billion in operating cash flow. The company trades at $35.82 with a price-to-earnings ratio of 8x and a 2.6% dividend yield.

CEO Clay Gaspar stated Devon “delivered another outstanding performance, achieving our best results of the year across all major value drivers.” The company exceeded production guidance at 853,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day while spending $859 million in capital, 5% below the midpoint of guidance.

Devon’s business optimization program has achieved more than 60% of targeted improvements within seven months, aiming for $1 billion in total efficiencies. The company plans to maintain 2026 production at 835,000 to 855,000 barrels per day while reducing capital requirements by $100 million from 2025 levels.

Analyst targets of $44.93 represent 25% upside, supported by 7 Strong Buy and 17 Buy ratings. The stock has nearly doubled over five years despite recent weakness.

1. Cheniere Energy Dominates U.S. LNG Exports Cheniere Energy (NYSE:LNG) operates as the largest U.S. liquefied natural gas exporter, with third-quarter revenue reaching $4.44 billion, up 19% year-over-year. The company trades at $194.30 with a price-to-earnings ratio of 11x and a 21.1% profit margin.

Net income for the quarter totaled $1.05 billion. Cheniere has nearly tripled over five years and increased 475% over the past decade, reflecting its strategic position in global energy markets.

Analyst targets of $270.77 represent 40% upside, the highest among energy stocks covered, with 7 Strong Buy and 14 Buy ratings. As European and Asian demand for U.S. LNG continues growing, Cheniere benefits from long-term contracts and expanding export capacity.

The stock trades down 14% over the past year despite strong fundamentals, creating an attractive entry point. With global energy security concerns driving LNG demand and U.S. production advantages supporting exports, Cheniere offers the most compelling risk-reward profile in the energy sector.

The Path to Doubling These five stocks combine operational excellence, strong cash generation, and significant analyst upside targets. Cheniere Energy leads with 40% upside potential and dominant market position in LNG exports. Devon Energy and Diamondback Energy offer value through cost discipline and massive shareholder returns. EQT Corporation provides natural gas growth exposure at a discount, while Weatherford International demonstrates momentum in oilfield services recovery.

If You’ve Been Thinking About Retirement, Pay Attention (sponsor) Retirement planning doesn’t have to feel overwhelming. The key is finding expert guidance, and SmartAsset’s simple quiz makes it easier than ever for you to connect with a vetted financial advisor. Here’s how:

Answer a Few Simple Questions.  Get Matched with Vetted Advisors  Choose Your  Fit  Why wait? Start building the retirement you’ve always dreamed of. Get started today! (sponsor)

Analyst’s Disclosure:I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses in Freeport-McMoran to Contact Him Directly to Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in Freeport between February 15, 2022 and September 24, 2025 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - January 10, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Freeport-McMoran Inc. ("Freeport" or the "Company") (NYSE: FCX) and reminds investors of the January 12, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that: (1) Freeport did not adequately ensure safety at the Grasberg Block Cave mine in Indonesia;(2)the lack of proper safety precautions constituted a heightened risk that could foreseeably lead to the death of Freeport's workers; (3) this constituted an undisclosed heightened risk of regulatory, litigation, and reputational risk; and (4) as a result, Defendants' statements about Freeport-McMoRan's business, operations, and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

On September 9, 2025, Freeport disclosed it was suspending mining activities at its Grasberg Block Cave operation in Indonesia, after "a large flow of wet material" trapped seven workers.

On this news, Freeport's stock price fell $2.77, or 5.9%, to close at $43.89 per share on September 9, 2025, thereby injuring investors.

Then, on September 24, 2025, Freeport provided an update on the incident, disclosing that two of the trapped team members "were regrettably fatally injured[.]" Meanwhile, "extensive efforts" remained "ongoing in the search for [the five] team members who [remained] missing."

On this news, Freeport's stock price fell $7.69, or 17%, to close at $37.67 per share on September 24, 2025.

Then, on September 25, 2025, before market hours, Bloomberg published an article stating that the "halt in production at the giant Grasberg copper mine in Indonesia looks set to strain the fractious relationship between [Freeport] and its host nation, at a time when the Jakarta government was already looking to take greater control." The article specified that "[the] state controls 51% of the local entity - after a lengthy battle over ownership - but officials have sporadically continued to demand an increased share. That clamor may now intensify."

On this news, Freeport's stock price fell $2.33, or 6.2%, to close at $35.34 on September 25, 2025, thereby injuring investors further.

On September 28, 2025, a news organization focusing on Indonesia, published an article entitled "Freeport Landslide was Preventable, Not Just a Natural Disaster, Says Expert." The article quoted an expert as saying "this danger is not new and should have been anticipated from the beginning[.]"

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Freeport's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the Freeport-McMoran class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/FCX or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/279922

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

Vitalik Buterin just gave Bitcoin maximalists something they rarely get from the Ethereum camp: credit.

The Ethereum co-founder responded to a viral 2026-30 predictions post discussing the split between the “open web” and “sovereign web.” Buterin latched onto this distinction and introduced a new term to describe what’s wrong with most of today’s internet: corposlop.

What Is Corposlop?Buterin said the distinction helped him recognize something he hadn’t fully articulated before. What many people still think of as the “open web,” he argued, has increasingly turned into something else entirely.

He described corposlop as a mix of “corporate optimization power,” polished branding, and behavior that looks respectable on the surface but exists purely to maximize profit.

That includes platforms that push outrage and dopamine-heavy content, mass data collection, closed ecosystems with high fees, and trend-driven products that feel repetitive and hollow. In his words, corposlop is “trend-following homogeneity that is both evil and lame.”

Bitcoin Maxis Saw It ComingButerin acknowledged Bitcoin maximalists’ resistance to ICOs, altcoins, and token speculation. Their goal was keeping Bitcoin sovereign and outside the corposlop system.

“I must admit the bitcoin maximalists were far ahead,” he said. “Their fear was real.”

He disagrees with their methods, specifically government crackdowns and limiting Bitcoin’s technical capabilities. But the underlying concern was legitimate.

What Sovereignty Means NowButerin argued that sovereignty today goes far beyond holding private keys. It now includes protecting digital privacy, limiting corporate control over attention, and resisting systems designed to extract time, data, and money.

“Today, ‘sovereignty’ also means securing your digital privacy through cryptography, and securing your own mind from corporate mind warfare,” he wrote.

His message to builders and users was direct and ideological: “Be sovereign. Reject corposlop. Believe in somETHing.”

What This Means for Crypto UsersThe corposlop framework gives users a filter for evaluating wallets, DEXs, and protocols. The question is simple: does this product empower you or extract from you?

Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.

Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.

Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.

Journalist

Posted: January 10, 2026

Cosmos has continued with its remarkable uptrend since it broke out and retested the trendline days ago. In fact, ATOM jumped to a high of $2.65, a level last seen in November – Signaling renewed market optimism.

At the time of writing, Cosmos [ATOM] was trading at $2.64 – Up 8.2% on the daily charts and 19% on the weekly charts. The altcoin’s price uptick was backed by a 20% jump in volume and 8.2% in market cap, alluding to a hike in usage activity.

On-chain activity indicates a rising adoption rate Cosmos saw a sharp drop in its network usage through the fourth quarter of 2025. In fact, network activity plummeted, with active addresses dropping from an average of 60k to below 1k. 

However, as 2026 kicked in, Cosmos saw renewed demand, and the network usage rebounded. The number of active users increased from 4k to 8k, pushing the total addresses to 3.5 million. 

Source: Artemis

Over the same period, the number of daily transactions rebounded from 13k to 30k, extending total transactions to 86.9 million. 

Typically, when both transactions and addresses rise in tandem, it signals growing network adoption. The demand linked to such hikes is often organic. Not driven by a few large wallets reflecting strengthened fundamentals. In fact, such demand supports the token’s long-term value. 

Demand for ATOM surges across market participants As the market rebounded, buyers stepped in and defended higher levels across the Spot and Futures markets. 

According to Coinalyze, buyers displaced sellers after six days of sustained selling pressure. Cosmos recorded 4.2 million in Buy Volume compared to 3.9 million in Sell Volume. 

Source: Coinalyze

As a result, the altcoin recorded a positive Buy Sell Delta of 300k – A clear sign of aggressive spot accumulation. Historically, strong demand on the spot market has accelerated the price’s upward momentum due to rising scarcity. 

On the Futures side, ATOM’s Open Interest climbed by 10% to $183 million while derivatives volume jumped by 27% to $220 million. 

Source: Coinglass

Often, a rise in derivatives volume alongside OI means greater participation with higher capital flows. In fact, Futures inflows surged to $53.09 million while outflows fell to $49.04 million too. 

As a result, Futures netflows surged by 475.9% to $4.05 million – Indicative of strong demand for Futures positions, whether short or long.

Source: Coinglass

In this case, most participants took short positions as the Long/Short Ratio remained below 1 and hinted at bearish expectations.

Can ATOM’s momentum hold? The altcoin recorded sustained gains on the price charts as buyers stepped in with strength across the Spot and Futures markets, backed by strong fundamentals. In doing so, they bolstered the tokens’ momentum and ATOM flipped short-term moving averages, EMA 2o and 50.

At the same time, ATOM’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) surged to 70, indicating total buyer dominance in the market. Such market conditions are evidence of its trend strength and its likelihood to continue.

Source: Tradingview

Therefore, if demand across the market holds, ATOM could successfully test EMA 100 at $2.7 and target its long-term resistance at $3.3.

However, if the momentum fades, ATOM will retrace to $2.2.

Final Thoughts ATOM surged by 8% and hit a two-month high of $2.65, before retracing on the price charts. Network usage rebounded, driving demand for ATOM across the Spot and Futures markets. 

Bitcoin traded around $90,600 as of writing, posting a slight weekly gain of 1.05% while remaining locked in a narrow $89,000–$94,000 range. Price stability at these levels has coincided with a sharp change in trading behavior across the crypto market. 

As Bitcoin paused, traders redirected activity toward alternative cryptos, driving a notable surge in altcoin trading volume.

Altcoins Overtake Bitcoin and Ethereum in VolumeMarket data as of January 10 shows that altcoins now account for roughly 50% of total cryptocurrency trading volume. Bitcoin represents about 27% of activity, while Ethereum contributes close to 23%. This marks the first time in several months that altcoins have exceeded the combined trading share of the two largest digital assets.

Source: CryptoQuant

The shift reflects rotation rather than capital flight. Total market participation remains elevated, yet liquidity has moved toward higher-volatility assets that tend to outperform during consolidation phases. 

Historical patterns show similar volume rotations when Bitcoin trades sideways after a strong rally. What stands out this time? The speed of the transition has caught traders' attention.

Source: X

High-Beta Tokens Drive the RotationSeveral altcoins have posted outsized gains during this period. Polygon rallied more than 50% on the week following its Open Money Stack launch, drawing fresh speculative interest. Solana-based memecoins also gained traction, with BONK rising 28% as decentralized exchange activity surged.

Binance ecosystem tokens participated as well. BNB advanced about 3.4% over seven days amid reports of Binance expanding operations across Asia. These moves helped lift the Altcoin Season Index from December lows, signaling increasing momentum toward non-Bitcoin assets.

Despite the volume surge, Bitcoin dominance by market cap remains elevated at 58.51%. This divergence between volume and market cap suggests short-term trading activity rather than a structural leadership change. Is this rotation tactical rather than transformative? Current data points in that direction.

Ethereum Anchors Liquidity but Faces ETF OutflowsEthereum continues to act as the liquidity backbone for altcoin markets. Daily trading volume near $15.2 billion still exceeds Solana’s $2.1 billion by a wide margin. However, ETF data reveals a contrasting trend. On January 9, U.S. spot ETH ETFs recorded $93.82 million in net outflows, marking the third consecutive day of withdrawals.

Source: X

Grayscale’s ETHE shed another $10 million, while BlackRock’s ETHA led exits with nearly $85 million. These flows align with profit-taking following Ethereum’s 113% rebound from April 2025 lows. ETF assets under management now sit about 7.6% below their December peak, which has limited near-term price discovery.

Market Sentiment Reflects Selective Risk AppetiteOn-chain data from CoinCodex shows altcoins outperforming Bitcoin in the short term, supported by rising volumes in DeFi, memecoins, and infrastructure tokens. At the same time, institutional exposure remains concentrated in Bitcoin and Ethereum through regulated products.

The Fear and Greed Index sits near 41, signaling neutral sentiment rather than euphoria. Bitcoin trades below its 200-day simple moving average and shows muted momentum despite price stability. These conditions often encourage traders to seek higher returns elsewhere, reinforcing the current volume imbalance.

What the Volume Shift SignalsTrading volume dominance has historically preceded broader capital rotation phases, yet it has not guaranteed sustained altcoin rallies. Analysts note that Ethereum often leads these cycles, followed by large-cap altcoins before smaller tokens participate.

 For now, volume concentration remains selective, not broad-based.

If Bitcoin breaks decisively from its range, the balance could change quickly. Until then, altcoins appear to hold the trading spotlight, even as Bitcoin retains its market cap crown. How long can this split dynamic last? Market structure over the coming weeks may provide the answer.

Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

XRP holders’ lawyer, John Deaton, has praised Ripple’s resilience and long-term focus in overcoming regulatory pressure, which has led to a thriving company. Deaton's applause came as a reaction to Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse’s New Year message, which highlighted significant milestones of the company.

How Ripple achieved $40 billion valuationNotably, Deaton stated that given the company’s achievement in 2025, even those who hate Ripple must admit the huge accomplishments.

He believes that Ripple’s ability to accomplish so much in 2025 despite broader regulatory pressure and challenges remains commendable.

Ripple has had a long, drawn-out legal battle with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for about five years. The lawsuit, which commenced in 2020, finally concluded in 2025 with a $125 million fine, but the court upheld XRP’s non-security status. This decision was considered a huge milestone in the digital asset space.

Despite that challenge, Ripple currently stands at a $40 billion valuation.

Even those who hate @Ripple must admit:

To weather a multi-year federal assault - remain focused on building the plumbing for the future of global finance - come out the other side with a $40B valuation - and a global licensing portfolio - is legendary stuff. https://t.co/ILLx3Y8hd1

— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) January 10, 2026 Deaton maintains the accomplishment can only be pulled off by a "legendary" firm. He is implying that other firms could have collapsed or shut down operations as a result of the tough test that it passed through in 2025.

The $40 billion valuation was achieved through acquisitions like Ripple Prime and GTreasury as well as its global expansion.

GTreasury, which was acquired in December 2025 for $1 billion, is meant to further transform cross-border payments. Ripple intends to leverage it to overcome the challenges of trapped liquidity, slow settlement and high transaction costs in the traditional banking system.

Ripple's utility-first strategy positions XRP for institutional adoptionAccording to Brad Garlinghouse, Ripple plans to stay focused on transforming crypto-based products like XRP and Ripple USD stablecoin (RLUSD). He emphasized that Ripple will move away from chasing market hypes and cycles to real-world utility.

You Might Also Like

Interestingly, Garlinghouse hinted that the recent green light on the U.K. Electronic Money Institution license will make 2026 more remarkable for the company. This is because Ripple now holds a very comprehensive licensing portfolio that would enable it to deliver regulated crypto infrastructure across the region.

On his part, Ripple’s executive Reece Merrick has predicted that the crypto sector is likely to see increased institutional adoption in 2026. Merrick opines that crypto is no longer an optional asset as a result of rapid changes and supportive legislation like the GENIUS Act.

Pi Network has launched an upgrade that simplifies Pi payment integration  for apps in under 10 minutes. Despite the ecosystem-focused upgrade, Pi Coin price remains unchanged. Pi Network has released a new developer library earlier this morning, which offers developers to integrate Pi payments into their apps in just 10 minutes of time, which bolsters and expands the network’s real-world, utility-driven ecosystem. With that, its native token PI price failed to show any price gain, currently trading at $0.2088.

As the new year starts, it’s time to build! Pi Network has released a new developer library that enables Pi payments to be integrated into Pi apps in under ten minutes. The library combines the Pi SDK and backend APIs into a single setup, reducing integration time across common…

— Pi Network (@PiCoreTeam) January 9, 2026 The Pi network has taken a long-term strategic decision to improve its own ecosystem by simplifying payment integration time, which enables developers to focus more time on building and upgrading real products, prototypes for users, and launch apps soon with Pi payments allowing important products to reach customers sooner.

Unified Developer Tools for Faster Pi Payments As per the blog post by Pi Network, the new developer library unifies the Pi SDK and backend APIs into a single setup, making it simpler and quicker for developers to integrate Pi payments into their applications. 

With that the first edition of the library is compatible with popular and widely used development tools, so many current apps can add Pi payments without major changes, while new apps building  with Pi from the start doesn’t require long setup times where developers can utilize JavaScript or React to build the front end means what users see and interact with. On the server side,which is the back end, the library supports frameworks such as Next.js and Ruby on Rails that makes integration easier for a variety of apps.

Pi Coin Shows No Gains  After the latest upgrade news, the native token Pi Coin has been trading around $0.208 – $0.209, with no major ups and downs, the 24-hour trading volume is also down by nearly 14%, while the article is being written, which suggests that the ongoing ecosystem progress does not reach the market expectations, as there is no immediate price appreciation is seen.  However, it is trading 31.69% higher from its all-time low level of $0.1585 occurred in October 2025. 

Highlighted Crypto News Today:

‌NFT Sales Jump 27% Despite Sharp Drop in Market Activity

Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

XRP has registered a significant rise within the last 24 hours as investors rekindle their bet on the coin. CoinGlass data shows that open interest has surged to over $4.03 billion as 1.93 billion XRP were committed to the futures market by traders on different exchanges.

CME and Binance lead XRP futures betsNotably, a total of 4,050,000,000 XRP were committed; the coin held steady and traded above its $2.05 support. In the crypto market, open interest signals positive anticipation of a possible price rebound from traders. Hence, this uptick suggests that traders are bullish about XRP.

XRP, despite its recent volatility, has managed to stay above $2. The coin climbed from a daily low of $2.08 to $2.15 as it attempted to reach higher levels. As of this writing, XRP changes hands at $2.10, which represents a 0.46% increase in the last 24 hours.

Although the coin has potential for more upside, investors have not thrown their full weight behind XRP. Trading volume remains down by 30.51% at $2.67 billion. XRP’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) signals accumulation momentum might be building, and if volume jumps, a breakout above $2.15 is possible.

While the broader market investors anticipate this breakout, traders on the CME and Binance exchanges are leading in their bet on XRP. CME traders bet $894.70 million or 425.88 million XRP on the futures market, while Binance logged 293.13 million XRP valued at $615.52 million.

Other significant exchanges include Gate, Bybit and Bitget with 12.95%, 10.53% and 10.4% of total open interest. In fiat terms, these committed $524.46 million, $426.54 million and $421.12 million, in that order, to XRP’s future.

You Might Also Like

Whale activity, technical signals hint at XRP reboundAs reported by U.Today, within the last 48 hours, an aggressive whale went long on XRP and has bet $30 million on the asset. The whale’s activity on-chain has caught the market’s attention because, in December 2025, he timed the Bitcoin dump to get a major boost in investment.

These developments signal that XRP might be preparing for a bullish rebound that could see the price reclaim stronger levels.

XRP’s technical signal, the Bollinger Band, indicates that the coin’s mid-band hints at a continued bullish trend. If this positive signal lingers, it could support the anticipated rally.

Meanwhile, there has been an increase in on-chain activity that involves treasury movement, settlement demand and institutional testing on XRP Ledger. Such a spike in network activity could trigger a price gain in the long run.

American Resources Corp (NASDAQ:AREC) CEO Mark Jensen talked with Proactive about the company’s latest milestone — securing a $200 million funding facility that fully capitalizes its ReElement Technologies division.

This strategic partnership, led by Transition Equity Partners, is expected to propel the company toward full-scale production of separated and purified rare earth oxides.

Jensen detailed that the capital will support production of up to 8,000 metric tons of oxides, 1,500 metric tons of yttrium and gadolinium, as well as germanium and gallium.

Highlighting the importance of strategic alignment, he described the investor relationship as focused on execution and value creation, rather than just financial terms.

He also discussed the critical role of elements like samarium, which is used in samarium-cobalt magnets for defense applications. With raw materials coming from Southeast Asia and growing customer demand, the company aims to meet market needs with 99.99% purity materials.

In addition, Jensen updated viewers on the Marion plant, which is expected to be operational by Q2. Over 75% of the equipment has already been acquired, and daily installations are ongoing, with plans to expand usable space to over 250,000 square feet.

Proactive: Welcome back inside our Proactive newsroom. And joining me now is Mark Jensen. He is the CEO of American Resources Corp. And Mark, it's great to see you again. Happy New Year to you.

Mark Jensen: Good to see you.

Exciting news after the company once again securing a $200 million facility to really make the growth happen — in a big way, in a short amount of time. So tell me a bit about this company you're working with and what this is going to do.

Yeah, absolutely. It’s just a phenomenal partnership. The $200 million for ReElement fully capitalizes the business to go to full scale — going to 8,000 metric tons of separated purified oxides, 1,500 metric tons of yttrium, gadolinium, and then germanium and gallium as well.

When we went out to capitalize the business, culture meant everything. Having an investor aligned with our goals was important — both for the defense industry and our commercial partnerships. Transition Equity fit that perfectly. Pat Eilers and his team are awesome people to work with — as strategic as they are investors.

Yeah, and that’s the part I want to get into — the strategic aspect. Because in the news release you mentioned this isn't just about capital, it's about strategy and involvement.

Yeah, 100%. We work with them daily — not about covenants and financial terms, but about business. It's about bringing value to the company. He's a patriot — the whole team is — and they're dedicated to US-first principles.

Even before closing the deal, he brought us the Uzbekistan tungsten deal for American Resources. He's invested in ReElement, and we’ll use ReElement for refining. But it’s all about execution. They open doors, make introductions, and bring value far beyond a traditional investor.

And another part of the news — the critical metals not being processed right now. The work you’re doing is filling a market void.

Absolutely. Samarium, for example, is used in samarium-cobalt magnets — the number one magnet used by the defense industry. We're expanding samarium processing. We’re bringing in ore from Southeast Asia that processes samarium, yttrium, gadolinium — even dysprosium and terbium — at large scale and low cost.

Yttrium and gadolinium are widely used in defense. We produce at 99.99% purity today. There's huge market demand, and we have a strong customer Rolodex. With the capital now secured, we’re already deploying funds and growing rapidly. This fully capitalizes ReElement’s domestic and international operations.

And lastly, on the Marion plant — you mentioned expanding capacity. What’s the infrastructure update?

Even before this capital and the OSC deal with the U.S. government, we acquired over 75% of the equipment going into Marion. The goal is to have it running in Q2 this year.

We’re already doing work there — our president is onsite today, doing pre-processing on magnet material. Equipment is arriving and being installed daily. There’s no sleep at the company right now — and that’s a good thing.

We’re also renovating the remaining 113,000 square feet to give us over 250,000 square feet of usable space. It’s a beautiful facility and community, and this industry belongs there.

Quotes have been lightly edited for clarity and style

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

© zhudifeng / Getty Images

The Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (NYSEARCA:FDIS) isn’t making headlines, and that’s the point. Up 3% to start 2026 after a 7% gain in 2025, this $1.9 billion fund has quietly underperformed the broader market while charging just 0.084% annually. The question is whether sleepy becomes profitable as consumer spending shifts in 2026.

FDIS gives investors pure-play exposure to consumer discretionary stocks, tracking an MSCI index that’s 97.7% concentrated in the sector. Nearly 40% of the portfolio sits in just two stocks. Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN) commands 21% while Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) holds 18.28%, creating a tug-of-war playing out in real time. Amazon is up nearly 6% year-to-date, while Tesla has declined 3.75%, explaining much of FDIS’s early momentum.

This infographic provides a comprehensive look at the Fidelity MSCI Consumer Discretionary Index ETF (FDIS), detailing its mechanics, ideal use cases, and a balanced list of pros and cons for potential investors. Consumer Spending: The Make-or-Break Factor The biggest macro force shaping FDIS in 2026 is consumer spending growth, which economists expect to moderate significantly. S&P Global forecasts real consumer spending growth will slow to 2% in 2026 from 2.7% historically, marking a cycle low. This matters because consumer discretionary stocks live and die by discretionary income. When households tighten budgets, they cut restaurant visits, delay home improvement projects, and postpone new car purchases before touching essentials.

The positive signal? Recession probability on prediction markets has dropped from 32% to 23.5% over the past month, suggesting the economy may achieve a soft landing. For FDIS investors, this is the data point to watch. Monthly consumer spending reports from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, released around month-end, will show whether households are maintaining spending patterns or pulling back. If spending growth stays near 2%, FDIS should hold up. If it dips toward 1%, expect the ETF to struggle as investors rotate toward defensive sectors.

The Tesla Problem While macro trends set the stage, FDIS’s micro challenge is Tesla’s earnings deterioration. The company’s annual earnings per share collapsed 63.8% in 2025, falling from $2.32 to just $0.84. Tesla’s Q1 2025 earnings missed estimates by 65.71%, posting $0.12 EPS versus $0.34 expected, in what was arguably the worst quarterly performance since the company turned consistently profitable.

At 18.28% of FDIS, Tesla’s fundamental weakness creates significant downside risk that Amazon’s strength may not fully offset. Investors should monitor Tesla’s quarterly earnings reports and delivery numbers. If Tesla can stabilize earnings around current levels, FDIS remains viable. If earnings continue deteriorating or delivery growth stalls, that 18% allocation becomes a millstone.

Consider VCR Instead For investors seeking similar exposure with less single-stock risk, the Vanguard Consumer Discretionary ETF (NYSEARCA:VCR) offers a compelling alternative. VCR charges just 0.09% annually (only slightly higher than FDIS) but brings $6.9 billion in assets and a track record dating to 2004 versus FDIS’s 2013 inception. VCR’s concentration is marginally lower, with Amazon at 21.4% and Tesla at 17.4%. VCR’s larger asset base provides better liquidity and tighter bid-ask spreads for active traders.

The Bottom Line FDIS’s 2026 performance hinges on whether consumer spending holds near 2% growth and whether Tesla can stop the earnings bleeding. Watch the monthly consumer spending reports and Tesla’s quarterly delivery numbers. Those two factors will determine if this sleepy ETF delivers easy money or just more mediocrity.

Released: The Ultimate Guide To Retirement Income (sponsor) Most investors spend years learning how to pick good stocks and funds. Far fewer have a clear plan for turning those investments into a reliable retirement paycheck. The truth is, the transition from “building wealth” to “living on wealth” is one of the most overlooked risks facing successful investors in their 50s, 60s and 70s.

That is exactly what The Definitive Guide to Retirement Income was created to solve. It’s a free guide that outlines the straightforward math and strategies you need to convert your investments to income. Learn more here.

Disclosure: The opinions, analyses, and evaluations here are ours and not provided by any bank, financial institution, or any other company. They have not reviewed, approved or endorsed our content.

HomeDividends AnalysisDividend Strategy

SummaryThe S&P 500 offers a meager 1.1% yield, along with a roller-coaster ride on a regular basis. Most retirees do not like the idea of raising income by selling shares.The article presents a diversified, three-bucket retirement portfolio targeting 5.5%-6% income and 10%+ annualized growth over 10-15 years.Backtesting shows the combined model portfolio would have delivered 14% annualized returns since 2008, outperforming the S&P 500's 10.9%.Risks include high equity concentration and the complexity of the rotational bucket, but income focus aims to smooth volatility and reduce forced selling.Looking for more investing ideas like this one? Get them exclusively at High Income DIY Portfolios. Learn More » cagkansayin/iStock via Getty Images

Introduction: It is that time of the year when a lot of people make new resolutions only to forget them in a few weeks or sometimes a couple of months. To plan for retirement, there is no

Analyst’s Disclosure:I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of ABT, ABBV, CI, JNJ, PFE, NVS, NVO, AZN, UNH, CL, CLX, UL, NSRGY, PG, TSN, ADM, BTI, MO, PM, KO, PEP, EXC, D, DEA, DEO, ENB, MCD, BAC, PRU, UPS, WMT, WBA, CVS, LOW, AAPL, IBM, CSCO, MSFT, INTC, T, VZ, CVX, XOM, VLO, ABB, ITW, MMM, LMT, LYB, RIO, O, NNN, WPC, ARCC, ARDC, AWF, CII, CHI, DNP, PEO, USA, UTF, UTG, RFI, RNP, TLT either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Disclaimer: The information presented in this article is for informational purposes only and in no way should be construed as financial advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any stock. The author is not a financial advisor. Please always do further research and do your own due diligence before making any investments. Every effort has been made to present the data/information accurately; however, the author does not claim 100% accuracy. The stock portfolios presented here are model portfolios for demonstration purposes. For the complete list of our LONG positions, please see our profile on Seeking Alpha.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

I'm planning to focus on ETFs in 2026, and these are on the top of my buy list.

I've been an active investor for about 15 years, and most of my efforts have been focused on building a portfolio of individual stocks. There's a good reason for this -- it's entirely possible to beat the market by focusing on excellent businesses and holding their shares for as long as they remain excellent businesses. In fact, this is exactly how Warren Buffett (and many other wealthy investors) built their fortunes.

However, as I get a little older, my focus has started to shift toward exchange-traded funds, or ETFs. While I still add individual stocks to my portfolio, I'm also trying to build a more robust "backbone" that should perform well over time with minimal reliance on the performance of any individual company.

Image source: Getty Images.

Interest rates could unlock value Generally speaking, the real estate sector performs better when interest rates are lower, and I foresee the general direction of interest rates (both long- and short-term) heading lower in 2026. So, that's why I'm planning to add shares of the Vanguard Real Estate ETF (VNQ +0.20%) to my portfolio.

Today's Change

(

0.20

%) $

0.18

Current Price

$

89.47

There are a few reasons why lower rates are a positive catalyst for real estate investment trusts, or REITs:

Most obviously, lower interest rates make it cheaper for REITs to borrow money to buy properties. As rates fall, investors tend to move money out of vehicles like savings and money market accounts and into "riskier," higher-yielding assets, such as REITs. Less obviously, but very importantly, commercial properties derive much of their value from the interest rate environment. Without delving into details about concepts like capitalization rates, the short version is that, with all other factors being equal, properties tend to be worth more in a lower-rate environment. The Vanguard Real Estate ETF is an index fund that provides exposure to real estate investment trusts, and it has a low 0.13% expense ratio. This ETF is a great choice for income investors to hold, regardless of the rate environment, but if interest rates trend downward, it has the potential for market-beating total returns.

2026: The year of small-cap outperformance? Small-cap stocks have been trading at their lowest valuations relative to large caps since the late 1990s. Of course, with the rise of megacap tech stocks and the surge in artificial intelligence (AI) investment, there are some good reasons for a valuation gap. But it's gone a little too far. The average component of the Russell 2000 small-cap index trades for 2.1 times book value, while the average S&P 500 company trades for more than 5 times book.

The ETF that I invested the most money in during 2025 is the Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF (VTWO +0.76%), and I plan to continue to accumulate shares as we head into 2026.

With a rock-bottom 0.07% expense ratio and broad small-cap exposure, the Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF could be a big winner in 2026 and beyond. In fact, last time the valuation gap between large and small caps was this wide, small caps went on to outperform for more than a decade.

The AI trend should continue in 2026 and beyond There are trillions of dollars being invested in artificial intelligence infrastructure, and not only that, but the rate of investment is accelerating as we head into 2026. However, I already have exposure to the megacap AI stocks through other index funds, and evaluating individual AI companies isn't my specialty -- so I prefer the ETF route.

One in particular I'm planning to buy in 2026 is the Ark Autonomous Technology and Robotics ETF (ARKQ +1.86%), which is an actively managed ETF run by notable tech investor Cathie Wood.

The reason I find this ETF so appealing is that it offers exposure to a portfolio of stocks that could be big winners of the AI revolution, but it doesn't just focus on the megacaps. You won't find Nvidia or any of the other trillion-dollar tech companies among its top holdings. But you will find companies like Teradyne, Kratos Defense & Security, and Aerovironment.

If you aren't familiar with those, that's kind of the point. The Ark Autonomous Technology and Robotics ETF offers exposure to some excellent businesses that could be major AI winners and aims to produce returns that beat the AI benchmarks.

Great choices for 2026 and beyond To be clear, I'm planning to buy shares of all three of these ETFs as long-term investments, not just because I think they could outperform the market in 2026. There's no guarantee that interest rates will trend downward in 2026, nor is it possible to know whether there will be general weakness in the economy or any particular sector.

However, over the long term, investors who purchase these three ETFs at their current prices are likely to do quite well. And that's exactly why I'm planning to buy all three this year.

Matt Frankel, CFP has positions in Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Vanguard Real Estate ETF, and Vanguard Russell 2000 ETF. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends AeroVironment, Kratos Defense & Security Solutions, Nvidia, and Vanguard Real Estate ETF. The Motley Fool recommends Teradyne. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

For many, investing is about staying in for the long haul, especially if you want to generate a lifetime stream of income that will support you well into retirement. To reach this goal, many savvy investors turn to dividend paying stocks. These are stocks of companies that make regular payments to investors out of their profits. But you can also turn to dividend paying ETFs. These are diversified funds that can hold hundreds of dividend paying stocks hand picked by professionals from big names like JP Morgan and Blackrock.

But there are also tons of dividend paying ETFs out there. And their yields vary. Some have low yields, while others have much higher yields. So to narrow down your search, we tracked down 5 dividend ETFs that pay 5%+ yields and can have a nice spot in a long term investor’s portfolio.

So let’s take a closer look.

Global X SuperDividend U.S. ETF (DIV) Global X SuperDividend U.S. ETF (DIV) is a popular dividend paying ETF among investors. It generates an impressive yield of over 7%. It does this by investing in 50 of the highest dividend paying stocks in the United States. But its fund managers go beyond just picking dividend stocks with high yields. They also screen for stocks with low betas compared to the S&P 500. This can give investors the benefit of low volatility.

Moreover, the fund has net assets of over $657 million. And it’s delivered a five year return of around 2%. Plus, it also has a competitive expense ratio of 0.45%.

iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF (PFF) The iShares Preferred and Income Securities ETF (PFF) invests in preferred stocks with an aim to capture returns similar to high yield bonds combined with growth potential. Preferred stocks also generally have higher yields than common stocks, making this fund popular among income seeking investors.

This ETF has a large weighting in financial institutions with more than 65 percent of its holdings resting in that sector. But it also has a significant exposure to the industrial and utilities sectors. Utilities are often seen as a defensive sector, meaning it is generally known to remain resilient even in times of market downturns.

Moreover, the PFF holds net assets of more than $14 billion. And it has a competitive expense ratio of 0.45%.

Invesco S&P SmallCap High Dividend Low Volatility ETF (XSHD) The Invesco S&P SmallCap High Dividend Low Volatility ETF (XSHD)

The XSHD invests in 60 companies in the S&P SmallCap 600 Low Volatility High Dividend Index. These stocks have generally been known to offer high yields as well as experiencing less volatility, potentially making it suitable for low risk investors. This ETF and its corresponding invex are rebalanced and reconstituted semi annually on the last business day in January and July. It generates a high yield of more than 6%. It is largely concentrated in real estate including real estate investment trusts (REITs). These are companies that invest across a variety of income generating real estate like apartments and shopping centers. And it has a slightly lower expense ratio than other funds on this list at 0.30%. Additionally, this ETF holds net assets of around $70 million.

JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF (JEPI) The JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF (JEPI) functions a bit differently than other ETFs on this list. It generates income by investing in large cap U.S. stocks and selling options. It generates a yield of more than 8% and has earned a Morningstar Medalist Rating of Silver. Moreover, it screens for stocks with low volatility and uses a proprietary research strategy to find over and undervalued stocks with attractive risk/return
profiles. The fund is highly concentrated in communications services, consumer discretionary and consumer staples. And its top holdings include some tech giants of the so called Magnificent Seven. In addition, the fund holds net assets of more than $41 billion. And it offers a competitive expense ratio of 0.35%.

Global X SuperDividend ETF (SDIV) Those looking for international exposure may want to look into the Global X SuperDividend ETF (SDIV). This is the global cousin of DIV. And it generates an impressive yield of more than 9%. SDIV invests in 100 of the highest yielding stocks from around the globe. And it has maintained a strong track record, paying monthly distributions for the past 14 years. It tracks the Solactive Global SuperDividend Index. It’s primarily concentrated in the financials, energy, materials and real estate sectors. In addition, the fund holds net assets of more than $1 billion. But it has a slightly higher expense ratio than the other funds on our list at 0.58%.

Released: The Ultimate Guide To Retirement Income (sponsor) Most investors spend years learning how to pick good stocks and funds. Far fewer have a clear plan for turning those investments into a reliable retirement paycheck. The truth is, the transition from “building wealth” to “living on wealth” is one of the most overlooked risks facing successful investors in their 50s, 60s and 70s.

That is exactly what The Definitive Guide to Retirement Income was created to solve. It’s a free guide that outlines the straightforward math and strategies you need to convert your investments to income. Learn more here.

Disclosure: The opinions, analyses, and evaluations here are ours and not provided by any bank, financial institution, or any other company. They have not reviewed, approved or endorsed our content.

Analyst’s Disclosure:I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

When retirement income depends on predictable quarterly payments, dividend consistency matters more than clever stock selection.

NEW YORK, Jan. 10, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Leading international securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. (NYSE: ARE) and certain of the Company’s senior executives for securities fraud after a significant stock drop resulting from the potential violations of the federal securities laws.

If you invested in Alexandria Real Estate, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/alexandria-real-estate-class-action-lawsuit.

Investors have until January 26, 2026, to ask the Court to be appointed to lead the case. The complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of investors in Alexandria Real Estate securities. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and is captioned Hern v. Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc., et al., No. 2:25-cv- 11319.

Why is Alexandria Real Estate Being Sued For Securities Fraud?

Alexandria Real Estate is a real estate investment trust. Its tenants are concentrated in life science industries, such as pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies.

During the relevant period, Alexandria Real Estate touted its leasing volume and development pipeline, specifically regarding a property in Long Island City, New York, stating that leasing volume was “solid” and its pipeline was “well positioned to capture future demand when expansion needs arise.”

As alleged, in truth, Alexandria Real Estate was experiencing lower occupancy rates and slower leasing activity such that it was required to take a real estate impairment charge of $323.9 million with $206 million attributed to its Long Island City property.

Why did Alexandria Real Estate’s Stock Drop?

On October 27, 2025, Alexandria Real Estate announced results below expectations for 3Q 2025 and cut guidance for the remainder of the fiscal year. The company attributed the results to lower occupancy rates and slower leasing activity. It also announced a real estate impairment charge of $323.9 million with $206 million attributed to its Long Island City property, stating that the property was not a life science destination that could scale. Alexandria Real Estate also announced additional impairment charges that may be recognized in 4Q 25 ranging from $0 to $685 million. This news caused the price of Alexandria Real Estate stock to drop $14.93 per share, or more than 19%, from a closing price of $77.87 per share on October 27, 2025, to $62.94 per share on October 28, 2025.

Click here for more information: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/alexandria-real-estate-class-action-lawsuit.

What Can You Do?

If you invested in Alexandria Real Estate you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis; there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.

Submit your information by visiting:

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/alexandria-real-estate-class-action-lawsuit

Or contact:
Adam McCall
[email protected]
212.789.3619

Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?

BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named “Elite Trial Lawyers” by the National Law Journal, among the top “500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers” by Lawdragon, “Titans of the Plaintiffs’ Bar” by Law360 and “SuperLawyers” by Thomson Reuters. Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.’s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.

For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.

https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/alexandria-real-estate-class-action-lawsuit

Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses in Alexandria to Contact Him Directly to Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in Alexandria between January 27, 2025 and October 27, 2025 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - January 10, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. ("Alexandria" or the "Company") (NYSE: ARE) and reminds investors of the January 26, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that: Defendants provided overwhelmingly positive statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning the true state of its Long Island City (LIC) property; notably, the Company's claims and confidence about the leasing value of the LIC property as a life-science destination aligning with ARE's Megacampus™ strategy.

Alexandria issued a press release on October 27, 2025, reporting its financial results for the third quarter of 2025. Among other items, Alexandria reported third quarter earnings that fell short of analyst expectations, a 5% decline in revenue, and a 7% decline in adjusted funds from operation. Alexandria also reported a decline in its average occupancy rate from 94.8% in the prior year to 91.4%.

Following this news, Alexandria's stock price fell over 19% on October 28, 2025.

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Alexandria's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the Alexandria Real Estate Equities class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/ARE or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/279919

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

Analyst’s Disclosure:I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of TLRY either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.