Barry Ritholtz is a Bloomberg View columnist writing about finance, the economy and the business world. He started the Big Picture blog in 2003 and is the founder of Ritholtz Wealth Management, an asset management and financial planning firm. Ritholtz was previously the chief executive officer and director of equity research at FusionIQ, a quantitative research firm for which he continues to consult. He is the author of "Bailout Nation" and is a graduate of Stony Brook University and Yeshiva University's Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. He lives on New York's Long Island with his wife.
By just about every measure, Kansas' economic laboratory tax-cutting experiment is now over.
Depending upon the version you prefer, Welch was either a management genius, very lucky, or a cheater who cooked the books.
Trump's long-awaited “pivot towards being presidential” hasn't arrived, and by all indications never will.
Technology keeps people too busy to go to the mall, and gives them an alternative to buying lots of stuff.
The process of buying and selling a home in the U.S. is needlessly inefficient. That will inevitably change.
Trump will let a rule to go into effect requiring financial advisors to put client interests first. But more needs to be done.
Politics can and occasionally does matter to markets—just much less than many people assume.
Are you worried the VIX broke 10 this week? Well, you shouldn't be.
Barry Ritholtz takes issue with a recent report warning about the dangers of ETFs.
Fair value is a theoretical point that stocks careen past on their way to becoming wildly expensive or extremely cheap.
A new article comparing the two economic periods shows how partisan biases get in the way of clear analysis.
Like investments in the alcohol industry after Prohibition was repealed, the marijuana business is an enticing opportunity.
You should have more than a passing familiarity with those writing about finance.
This investing concept sounds intriguing at first, but doesn't hold up to close scrutiny.
It’s a good time to revisit the actual impact of the Glass-Steagall Act repeal.