2026.10.10 | GP | Insurance | Nvidia Insuring AI Chip-Backed Loans

Associated:

RNR

EG

Munichrealty GmbH

SREN:SW

CB

TRV

ACGL

AIG

ALL

HIG

MMC

AJG

AON

Viewpoint:

Industry Consultant

Moderator: Amir Attaar (AA)

Michael P Dellova (MPD), Former Senior Director of Global Services and Solutions, North America - Willis Towers Watson

SUMMARY

Overview

The discussion examined how trade credit insurance could support loans used to purchase AI chips. The expert expects the product to resemble established trade credit coverage rather than a wholly new insurance category. It would protect lenders against customer defaults while allowing the chip supplier to receive payment upfront.

Coverage would likely be customized for each buyer or transaction rather than pooled under one broad policy. Pricing would reflect customer credit quality, policy limits, deductibles, geopolitical exposure, payment terms, and collateral depreciation. The customer would ultimately bear the insurance cost through the overall financing or chip price.

Key Insights

The expert strongly expects insurance-backed financing to expand the AI infrastructure market by improving access to capital for cloud providers, data-center operators, and government-linked buyers. Adoption could accelerate quickly because insurers already possess established trade credit underwriting models. The expert believes the business could be more profitable than conventional trade credit, despite intense insurer competition. Initial financing terms may be short, potentially around one year, with longer periods available to established, creditworthy customers. Major regional conflict, sanctions, or concentrated exposure across interconnected buyers represent the most significant risks. No single insurer is expected to cover every buyer because carriers will seek to limit accumulation risk. A supplier-owned captive insurer could emerge after the market reaches sufficient scale, but substantial capital, regulatory work, and setup time make near-term use of commercial insurers more likely.

Competitive Landscape

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

Participant

Positioning and implications

AI chip supplier

Likely to influence lender and insurer selection while embedding coverage costs into transactions. Its market importance may strengthen insurer appetite.

Large global insurers

Several major US and European carriers are viewed as credible participants due to existing trade credit capabilities and international reach.

Domestic-focused insurers

May be less competitive for globally distributed transactions.

Specialist insurance markets

Syndicated capacity could supplement primary insurers for large or complex risks.

Brokers

Reinsurers

Expected to structure placements, negotiate terms, and coordinate among the supplier, lenders, and insurers.

Could provide facultative protection and become especially important if a captive insurer is later established.

Competing chip suppliers

Could benefit if customers face long delivery delays, increasing pressure on the market leader to accelerate supply and financing.

Quantitative Insights

Metric

Expert’s assessment

Potential insured share

Coverage could reach approximately 80% of a transaction, subject to deductibles.

Illustrative payment structure

A 25% deposit followed by 10 installments was used as an example.

Expected initial term

Potentially within one year; stronger repeat buyers might receive terms of up to three years.

Data-center backlog mentioned

Approximately $62 billion, illustrating substantial infrastructure demand.

Captive capitalization

Could require billions of dollars depending on domicile and regulation.

AA: My name is Amir Attaar, a moderator here at Guidepoint Insights. Thanks for joining our call today. Trade credit insurance, understanding the structure and risk of NVIDIA insuring AI chip-backed loans. Our advisor today is Michael Dellova, a former senior director of global services and solutions in North America at Willis Towers Watson. If you have any questions, please feel free to email me at ask@guidepoint.com and I'll work your questions into today's call and as always they're anonymous. Michael, let me remind you not to speak about security pricing, investment holdings or recommendations. With that, I'll turn it over to you and why don't you go ahead and give us a little more detail on your background.

Michael Dellova:

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

Okay, great. Well, hello, everyone. How are you? Thank you for asking me to participate. It is an honor. My name is Michael Dellova. I am an insurance executive for the past 35-plus years and still continuing at this point. As Amir pointed out, I've been working as a consultant on the brokerage side for the majority of my career. I started out at Marsh McLennan, then I was at Willis Towers Watson, and now I work for a firm known as Signers National. My experience has been advising clients in all industries, segments, working primarily in property and casualty insurance, both domestic and multinational.

AA: Perfect. Awesome. Yeah, so I'd love to discuss this, you know, nascent product that looks to be getting pushed by NVIDIA. I guess they want, you know, to create an insurance product which backs a credit insurance product which backs the credit risk of people buying chips. So I'm curious how you think this will be structured. I know we're just speculating, but curious how you think this will be structured, what products maybe most similarly resembles, and then who the ultimate risk bearers will be, likely risk bearers will be in this market.

Michael Dellova: Yeah, sure. So, Amir, with the prior conversations that we had leading up to this, when you had described the topic at hand, it falls under the purview of what we call trade credit insurance. And that has been a product that has been around for quite some time. It was originally a government-backed insurance product by the federal government of the US, and it was run under a division of the Treasury Department known as OPIC, which was the Overseas Private Investment Corporation. And I would say during the heyday of the Cold War, after the Cold War, as, you know, US government was trying to foment geopolitical ties with countries across the globe and regimes that were favorable to the US, of course. The US wanted to encourage business investment to go, and they provided the backstop, so to speak, if, say, for instance, corruption or failure to pay for the products or services that were being rendered by US businesses overseas and so forth. When the Cold War dissipated and the era of globalization took off and globalization took place at this point and US products and industries and means of production were going overseas and so forth. It expanded into the private market. So private insurers and name brands, which you probably are very familiar with, with the AIG, the Chubb, the Travelers of the world, started to provide private sector trade credit insurance, which was, you know, a private sector product with a strong policy cover and also would complement that with what we call political risk insurance in case of war where assets and such items were damaged and even to the point of expropriation if the assets were seized, like, you know, in the example of what we had seen in Venezuela over the years and so forth. So what has happened is that the private market has been very, very successful in underwriting trade credit across the globe. And in 2019, the first Trump administration actually disbanded OPIC. It no longer exists. So this is specifically a private sector type of product at this point in the insurance market. Now, what NVIDIA is trying to do is they're trying to create a very specific and bespoke trade credit product that is going to be specific to their contracts and their selling of their chips. So whereas trade credit would be broad underwriting looking at various businesses, various contracts, whether you're selling end product to a foreign land or you're entering into a contract with a supplier overseas to either manufacture your product or provide ingredients or raw materials that's necessary to create the product and so forth. NVIDIA is looking at this as they sell their chips overseas and, you know, and in a lot of instances, a lot of government or quasi-government customers are in the market for this, like say in India. So what they're hoping to do is they want to provide this backstop in case.

AA: You know, there is a failure to receive payment for the delivery of the chips.

Michael Dellova: Right. But is it for delivery of the chips or is it for the, I guess it could be structured for the delivery of the chips, but then also it could be, my understanding was it was for, you know, lending. So let's say someone is lending to a NeoCloud or a hyperscaler to buy chips, and then that counterparty doesn't pay the lender back.

AA: Yeah, and that's... ultimately we're saying the same thing. It's just the question of the layers, right? I mean, ultimately, NVIDIA wants to get paid for providing the chips on delivery. So whether it's through a third-party

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

financing mechanism or direct, one way or another, they're looking to provide some guarantee if there's a default on such financial transactions.

Michael Dellova: Yeah, got it. And who is NVIDIA would structure it like they would sell these chips with that wrapper essentially?

AA: I mean, it all depends. In other words, NVIDIA is going to arrange or contract with a financing agency for their customers and end users, and then they're going to look at providing insurance to that backstop. From what I understand, it might not always be 100% of whatever the transaction and the financing agreement is, and there might be a deductible and it might be a cover up to 80% of what the contract would entail. It wouldn't be like we called it an insurance, it's not a blanket limit.

Michael Dellova: Per se, and it would be facultative rather than by treaty. And what I mean by that is that there would be a separate policy or backstop for each transaction or at least one contract for each customer.

AA: Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Michael Dellova: Yeah.

AA: Yeah. So you'd be backstopping one specific client.

Michael Dellova: Yeah, it wouldn't be like you amalgamate all the financial transactions into one master policy of coverage. There would be specific to each. And I guess what it'll do is that from an underwriting perspective, based upon the credit worthiness of the end customer is how they would charge composite rate and determine the premiums on that.

AA: So you'd look at that NeoCloud and say, okay, these guys have a lot of cash, they've got a lot of revenue, they've got big premiums charged for them buying is lower. And I guess it would just be charged as part of the total product, like the cost of the chip, who's bearing the cost, I guess. Okay.

Michael Dellova: Okay. And the end customer is bearing the cost. And NVIDIA is probably pricing the cost of this backstop into the sale itself. I mean, I've seen this in my career, Amir, many, many times, when you have, let me give you a parallel example, right?

AA: Yeah.

Michael Dellova: If you have a subcontractor that's trying to get on a project like a construction site, the GC, the general contractor says, "Okay, we can get you on, but you have to get this insurance, you have to have this insurance, workers' comp and liability and everything else." And then what that subcontractor does is that they look at the cost of the insurance and they build that into their expense. When they say, "All right, we're bidding on this project, we want to be awarded. So here's what we're looking for in terms of revenue to do that." AA: Yeah.

Michael Dellova: NVIDIA is going to do the same thing. They're going to incorporate the cost of the insurance into the entire expense base of, you know, producing and transporting the chips and everything else. Got it. Okay. So if they're selling chips

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

for $100 with no insurance—I'm just making numbers up—and then say, okay, it's $110 with the insurance and then the lenders, you'll get easier financing through a Blackstone or Apollo or whoever because it's wrapped with insurance and then the insurance is on the hook. And then I guess that price, one of the biggest variables in that price will be creditworthiness of the NeoCloud or the hyperscaler that's buying it, the deductibles that are negotiated, any other big variables or those are...

AA: Well, the limit as well, and from what I understand, because NVIDIA is going to sell these worldwide, there's geopolitical variables in there that's going to bring the pricing into play.

Michael Dellova: Got it. Got it. And then those are all going to be determined by, you know, the buyer. So those will be, I don't know if bespoke is the right word, but they'll be counterparty dependent. And then overall in insurance, pricing the product, I guess the depreciation schedules and the counter for the collateral value. That'll be similar, I guess, assuming, you know, it's a similar GPU across the globe.

AA: Yeah, exactly.

Michael Dellova: The whole idea of the coverage is for the term of the payments, whatever the installment plan is; that'll be it. There won't be any. And Amir, we have a term in insurance: there's no tail coverage, so to speak. It'll also be finite. If there's a 25% down payment and 10 installments after that, then the trade credit is valid until that final installment is paid and complete. And then the trade credit gets null and void. It's no longer in effect. It's not there like a liability policy where you could have damage manifest over a period of time and come back to an occurrence policy that was issued in a prior policy year.

AA: Any idea how long these policies will be priced or it's just too...

Michael Dellova: I said, NVIDIA wants to get paid and the financing companies want to make money and they want their installments. I can't foresee. When I see financing arrangements like this in any make or mark, the financing really, it's not a long- term mortgage. I would say it's within a year.

AA: Oh, wow. So you think it's that short tail?

Michael Dellova: I think it would be. I think it's going to be pretty much short tail. I can't see the financing instrument looking at this like a bank loan, like a 30-year loan or a 3-year loan or anything of that nature. I would think everybody's just very interested in the cash flow aspect of this. The chips are being delivered and paid on delivery, so to speak.

AA: Yeah. I would have figured it may be short term, but I would have figured at least like 3 to 5 years or something. Because if you get paid in a year, then wouldn't they just get rid of it?

Michael Dellova: It's interesting you said that, Amir. I don't mean to digress, but I know that NVIDIA has a stake in that other company, CoreWeave, that does the data centers, right? And when you look at CoreWeave's financials, they have a $62 billion back order to build data centers overseas. And the CEO was on Liz Claman the other day speaking about expansion into India and things of this nature. Companies can't have that kind of delay, right? If they've got customers that are interested and they got that kind of backlog, you want to figure out a way to meet that demand and get those contracts and get those revenues in place. So, I'm looking at it is that they want to put that trade credit there because

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

they're going to try to front load the financing payments as quickly as possible. Maybe some customers will be allowed 3 years, maybe when they demonstrate a credit worthiness, right? But AA: Mm-hmm.

Michael Dellova: I would think in the very beginning, I mean, this is me personally speaking on behalf of you and Paul, I would say at this point they're going to try to get these financing agreements done within a year. Yeah.

AA: And sorry, why is that? Because overarching, there's just so much demand that they don't want to have these longer tail liabilities outside where this gets paid as fast as possible.

Michael Dellova: Not only that, the demand is there. Think about it. NVIDIA, of course, we know how prominent they are and they've got the advantage. But when you're telling customers, "Look, you have to wait in line until we can get around to you to make their product," they may turn to competitors, right, and you lose that business. So, 1, they've got to speed up the production, and number 2, they want to make sure that they get paid. From, it's a cash flow issue. And it's not so much NVIDIA because the financing will be done and NVIDIA will be paid. The financing companies want an opportunity to make money on the financing and then, of course, have the backstop of the trade credit in case.

AA: Yeah Michael Dellova: Those payments become overwhelming and burdensome and the customers default on the financing.

AA: Yeah. I guess from the standpoint of how long the agreement is, I would have figured that even if it's, let's say it's 3 years. The lender is providing all that money up front and NVIDIA is getting paid all of that up front, right?

Michael Dellova: Well, I mean, we don't have all the details, but I know when financing is in play, like in premium financing, the insurance carrier gets paid in full and then the insured would pay the financing company the down payment and the installments, which also is going to include interest, right? There's going to be interest on that. That's how the lending institution or the financing company makes their money. That's where they get the profit because you're going to pay for the financing. NVIDIA is going to get it. It's just a question of the credit insurance is going to be there so that the lenders stay in because most probably many of the purchasers, as much as they want the chips, they just don't have the ability from a cash flow perspective to pay everything up front 100% because the demand is there, but the cash flow is not equated to it.

AA: Yeah, I'm just talking about the payback schedule, I guess. I would have figured like they would have more than 1 year to pay it back, like if you're borrowing.

Michael Dellova: Well, you know what, Amir, what I would say is that if you have an ongoing customer that's proved themselves to be creditworthy, I'm sure NVIDIA would extend the financing over a 3-year period or if there was more of a long-term purchase. But I think with respect to an advent of the launch of this product and using it on pioneer customers, so to speak, I foresee them trying to say at this point, you know, we want this paid in full in a year.

AA: Makes sense. Yeah.

Michael Dellova: Yeah.

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

AA: It makes sense. Okay. And then how about in terms of, you know, pricing and valuing the collateral, like pricing the business and valuing the collateral, how complicated is this? It's a new product, so how much risk is there and how about the depreciation schedule and getting that right? And, you know, I'm just curious, is the product going to develop super slowly because these insurers are going to be worried about it and it's hard to price? Or do you think this could explode and, essentially, lenders are lending the equivalent of investment grade because it's insurance wrapped and you can really see a lot of capital flowing through? I know we don't know, but I'm just kind of curious, trying to wrap my head around... is it going to be a niche, a little bit of a tailwind that helps these hyperscalers because they get a little bit more financing, or could this really just, you know, really open up and explode the market?

Michael Dellova: I think it's going to expand the market, Amir. I would be on that side because... Like I tried to say in my opening comments, the private sector has done a very admirable job of being able to underwrite this more efficient and trade credit is a very profitable line of business for many insurance companies, you know, to the point that the federal government saw no further purpose in keeping the government backstop as opposed to comparing and contrasting. You have the government still providing a backstop to terrorism insurance, right, for TRIA that was passed in 2002. Here it is 2026. It's been modified and the government has scaled back on its reinsurance backstop, but it hasn't completely eliminated it yet. Trade credit from a government backstop position no longer exists. They do it. Underwriters have good actuarial models, you know, in the end. They know that NVIDIA itself, because of the sensitive nature of its product from a national security standpoint, that they're not going to be selling them to rogue mom and pop organizations. They're going to be very formidable customers. So... that clearance. You look at it from that perspective, there's credibility and contract certainty already built into it. But their experience in writing trade credit across the board is going to enable them to put actuarials in and get the coverage and to work with them. And I don't think this will be like an episode like with cyber insurance, like cyber liability insurance, where we saw bad actors create havoc and the underwriting ratios in cyber liability were disastrous and many insurance carriers had to pull out of the coverage altogether because they were hemorrhaging money in their surplus. I don't see that here with trade credit. I think this is going to be extremely profitable.

AA: Yeah. How about in terms of the depreciation schedules and just being able to price the risk? Do you think it's complicated or there's enough data out there and they can figure it out and it's not some black box and tough to price?

Michael Dellova: No, it's going to be... I don't think it's going to be complicated. I do think that when they get years of experience and some traction underwriting it, they'll make modifications. In any situation, with any line of insurance there's always a cycle, and you don't know what kind of systemic impacts can take place with respect to that. I mean... I could probably... I'm trying to fake blue sky right here and so forth. But if NVIDIA was selling to a multitude of different businesses and governments across the globe and there was a major regional conflict that takes place and customers of NVIDIA are on adversarial sides with one another and the federal government steps in and has to put sanctions controls or something like that, that could just send everything sideways at that point and wreak havoc. But again, that's a plausible outcome, but it's an extreme example. Barring something as cataclysmic as that, I really don't see any bad headwinds down the road.

AA: Right.

Michael Dellova: But again, that's a plausible outcome, but it's an extreme example. Barring something as cataclysmic as that, I really don't see any bad headwinds down the road.

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

AA: Yeah, but I guess a more nuanced question. I get it. You think it opens up the market. I agree with that because you're getting wrappers. The lenders feel more comfortable. But I'm curious, is it a product you think that they need years of experience? So they'll be nibbling and these insurers will get in and write a little bit over the next 3, 4, or 5 years to see how it plays out and dip their toe in the water, or do you think that this could rapidly expand from an insurance standpoint and a premium standpoint and really open up the market quickly?

Michael Dellova: Yeah, I think it's going to ramp up because you already have a lot of players in the trade credit insurance market to begin with, so they're AA: Yeah.

Michael Dellova: going to augment their product offering to do this. In any market economy, some of them are going to do it really well and some of them are not going to do it as well. And it's all a question of the product and the policy and what kind of terms and conditions they're offering that may be more attractive and so forth. I think from the NVIDIA standpoint, it probably... maybe they won't use 1 lending institution to finance these things, and then those folks will choose different insurers to provide the trade credit insurance. I don't know who is going to be the ultimate decision maker and who has the greatest leverage here. You would presume it would be NVIDIA, right? Because they want assurances, for instance, that they're going to get paid for their product. That's ultimately it. But in any other market competition, some insurers will stand out and they'll put out a great product in this space, and some of them will try, and some of them will either have to adjust to compete or they may pull out.

AA: Yep. Yeah, that makes sense. So I think a better way of asking is, it seems like this product, even though it's insuring a different collateral and GPUs, it's similar enough to trade credit where insurers will feel comfortable figuring out what that collateral is and writing Michael Dellova: Mm-hmm.

AA: the product, the players that are in trade credit, so they could rapidly get up to speed and expand that product.

Michael Dellova: Yeah, AA: Yeah.

Michael Dellova: and you have to also realize that the fact that, you know, NVIDIA's success is tied to US success and national security and so forth. So this is not a private sector, you know, product that's being exported, let's say, and left to its own demise, so to speak, you know, lots of eyes will be watching this very closely.

AA: Yeah. So who are the biggest players in trade credit? Who do you expect to be involved in this market?

Michael Dellova: You have in the US, Chubb is huge in trade credit, huge product offering, AIG. I'm trying to think of who else. Travelers, not so much. Travelers is really a domestic company, so to speak. But then you have foreign insurers like Allianz, AXA, Generali who are involved in that. Zurich is huge in trade credit. Swiss Re. Lloyd's puts out... Lloyd's has some syndicates that will put out trade credit as well. So you have a bevy of options across the globe.

AA: Yeah. And will brokers be involved in this or will it just go, will Nvidia just go directly to Michael Dellova:

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

No, AA: insurance?

Michael Dellova: There will be brokers. And again, it's a question of whose hand is on the levers making those decisions. Brokers will definitely be involved, whether they're appointed by the lending institution or Nvidia's broker who's arranging this and so forth.

AA: Got it. But how will the chain work? Will each lending institution, I guess, have a different insurer or will it just be like NVIDIA decides the insurer that's on this product and they sell it, you know, with the insurance wrapped, and then the lender can decide whether to lend or not to the NeoCloud? It's already wrapped. It's a wrapped GPU. I guess the size of the transaction will come from or can come from either side.

Michael Dellova: That's a TBD. I'm sure that NVIDIA and the lending institution will both have a hand in it because one doesn't want to see the other one fail. I mean, I don't see NVIDIA just leaving it to the lending institution to make those kind of decisions. I think they'll have a say in it. There's also a capacity issue, Amir. Just like another analogy, let's look at what AIG did with their market-backed derivatives mortgage security insurance that almost made them go bankrupt during the financial crisis. Underwriters from AIG and Lloyd's and Allianz and Chubb or whatever, they're going to watch the concentration of risk, so to speak. So the insurance companies themselves, they'll probably look at underwriting different customers because they don't want to be, God forbid, it becomes a house of cards and falls down. They don't want to be brought into that vortex like we saw in the financial crisis where AIG was just so overexposed on that product, when all those, when the Lehman Brothers and all of them and Merrill Lynch's went under, you don't want that. So, not one insurance company is going to write every single customer for NVIDIA. It's not going to be exclusive.

AA: Yeah. And then how about on the reinsurance side? Will this product be reinsurable?

Michael Dellova: Well, you know, that's up to the insurance companies themselves whether they do purchase reinsurance. I mean, it's accessible and whether or not they do it on a facultative basis. You know, I do see potentially down the line if you get enough critical mass in this. I wouldn't be surprised at some point if NVIDIA doesn't set up a captive to completely underwrite this, right? So they self-insure it, and then they would most definitely direct the captive to buy reinsurance on the back end to hedge their exposure.

AA: Right. That's interesting. So they can just, and why couldn't they, why aren't they doing that right off the bat? It's just hard to set up?

Michael Dellova: To set up a captive right now, you have to do a feasibility study, you have to find the domicile, you have to understand the capitalization requirements, you have to hire a captive manager to manage the surplus portfolio. It takes years to do that, Amir. It's not something that's like a turnkey or a startup situation. They need enough critical mass, plus the fact that, like, let's say, for instance, they put the captives in a European domicile, well, then they got to adhere to Solvency II regulations, and then NVIDIA has to take enormous amounts of capital, and they have to meet those requirements. We're talking billions of dollars that they'll have to set aside. Whereas right now, if the cost-benefit analysis is to do this in the private market, eventually when they do get enough critical mass, then it may be worthwhile to self-insure and look at the captives.

AA: Got it. Okay. So speed. And then also right now, they've just got better use of the cash.

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

Michael Dellova: Yeah, exactly. You know, they can use that cash in other directives at this point.

AA: Yeah. And how do you think about the economics from an insurance standpoint? Like, is this going to be a very high ROE business coming out of the gate? Or is it going to be just a typical trade credit ROE? Any sense on how it will be priced and what the returns will be?

Michael Dellova: I think the return on equity will be higher than the median return on trade credit in general. You know, you're talking about one of the crown jewels of American industry today, AA: Yeah.

Michael Dellova: And I'm sure the major insurers are... excuse my language, Amir... they're probably salivating or frothing at the mouth to write this. Because, AA: Yeah.

Michael Dellova: Like I said, they know there's so many eyes on this, and this is just too important to not succeed.

AA: But you don't think that creates a lot of competition where the Michael Dellova: Oh, AA: prices are Michael Dellova: It's going to create great competition. But like the CoreWeave example, the back order on this stuff, there are so many in the private sector and governments that understand that the NVIDIA chips and the data centers and... we'll call it super intelligence, like the president says... this is the future. This is of vital importance. So it is a long term coming. And like I said, some insurers will get it right and they'll put out a great product and others will get it wrong and they'll either have to make adjustments or they'll have to pull out of the market. But it's AA: Yep.

Michael Dellova: Going to attract a lot of capital, Amir. I mean, it's definitely going to be... this is where a mature industry like insurance sees a new opportunity and a new product. So AA: Yep. All right. Perfect. Great. Appreciate all the color. Thanks so Michael Dellova: Yeah.

AA: Much, Michael.

Michael Dellova: Yeah, it was a great conversation. I really enjoyed it. Thank you.

AA: Likewise. All right. Have a great weekend.

Michael Dellova: You too. It's good talking to you, Amir. Take care. Bye-bye.

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC

DISCLAIMER: The statements or opinions expressed today are those of the Advisor and not Guidepoint, who disclaims all liability for the content provided. The Advisor may not disclose material nonpublic or confidential information or any information that would cause the Advisor to breach any duty or obligations. Guidepoint is not a registered investment advisor and the information provided is not intended to constitute investment advice.

10/11/2026 at 11:29 AM UTC