Author

admin

Browsing

Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso is ready to go nuclear on Senate Democrats and their blockade of President Donald Trump’s nominees.

Before leaving Washington, D.C., to their respective home states, Senate Republicans were on the verge of a deal with their colleagues across the aisle to hammer out a deal to ram through dozens of Trump’s picks for non-controversial positions.

But those talks fell apart when Trump nuked any further negotiations over funding demands from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. Currently, there are 145 pending nominations on the Senate’s executive calendar, with that number expected to balloon when the upper chamber reopens for business.

Lawmakers are set to return on Tuesday, and Barrasso, R-Wyo., wants to immediately tackle the nomination quandary. He’s engaged in a public pressure campaign, writing an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal directly calling out Schumer.

Meanwhile, he’s facilitated talks among Senate Republicans on the best path forward, and told Fox News Digital in an interview that, at this point, he’s willing to do anything necessary to see the president’s picks confirmed.

‘We need to either get a lot of cooperation from the Democrats, or we’re going to have to roll over them with changes of the rules that we’re going to be able to do in a unilateral way, as well as President Trump making recess appointments,’ he said.

Senate Democrats, under Schumer’s direction, are unlikely to play ball, however.

Schumer, in response to Barrasso’s public jab against him and Senate Democrats, contended in a statement that ‘historically bad nominees deserve a historic level of scrutiny by Senate Democrats.’

‘Anybody nominated by President Trump is, in Schumer’s words, ‘historically bad.’ Why? Because they were nominated by President Trump,’ Barrasso shot back. ‘That is his sole criteria for which these people are being gone after and filibustered, each and every one of them, even those that are coming out of committee, many, many of whom are with bipartisan support.’

Unilaterally changing the rules, or the nuclear option, would allow Republicans to make tweaks to the confirmation process without help from Democrats, but it could also kneecap further negotiations on key items that would require their support to advance beyond the Senate filibuster.

Barrasso was not worried about taking that route, however, and noted that the nominees that he and other Republicans were specifically considering would be ‘sub-Cabinet level positions’ and ambassadors.

Up for discussion are changes to the debate time, what kind of nominee could qualify for a speedier process and whether to give the president runway to make recess appointments, which would require the Senate to go into recess and allow Trump to make appointments on a temporary basis.

‘When you take a look at this right now, it takes a 30-minute roll-call vote to get on cloture, and then two hours of debate time, and then another 30-minute roll-call vote,’ Barrasso said. ‘Well, that’s three hours, and it’s time when you can’t do legislation, you can’t do any of the other things.’

But there is a menu of key items that Congress will have to deal with when they return, particularly the deadline to fund the government by Sept. 30.

Barrasso acknowledged that reality, and noted that it was because of the hefty schedule that he wanted a rules change to be put front and center.

‘There’s not going to be any time to — or there’s going to be limited time, I should say, to actually get people through the nominations process, which is just going to drag on further, and you’ll have more people having hearings and coming out of committees,’ he said.  

‘This backlog is going to worsen this traffic jam at the Schumer toll booth. So, we are going to do something, because this cannot stand.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Demetre Daskalakis, an official at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), resigned this week, claiming the Trump administration’s policies ignore science. However, his own leadership during the Biden-era monkeypox response was criticized for putting optics over public health.

Amid the Trump administration’s efforts to push out CDC Director Susan Monarez, a handful of other top CDC officials, including Daskalakis, resigned in protest of the Trump administration’s policies. Daskalakis wrote in his resignation letter that was posted to social media that the health policies put forward by Secretary Robert F. Kennedy do not ‘reflect scientific reality.’ He also accused the Trump administration of attempting to ‘erase transgender populations,’ while also using the term ‘pregnant people’ to describe women who are about to give birth.

But flashback to 2022 and 2023, after the monkeypox virus had spread across several countries and made its way into the U.S., during which Daskalakis was among the Biden administration’s top advisers who spearheaded the national response to the disease outbreak. 

Government communications from that time period, uncovered by watchdog group the Oversight Project, show that officials were aware that the disease was spreading among the gay community. However, those communications, and other records, show the administration appeared to be more concerned with protecting the stigma targeting the gay community, than they were with implementing measures that would provide the best mitigation response.

‘A common theme was public health officials identifying locations where outbreaks occurred, to include bathhouses and saunas,’ according to the Oversight Project. ‘Officials never broached consideration of shutting down these locations. This draws a stark contrast to the public health guidance and shutdowns of gathering places during COVID, to include gyms and skate parks.’

In 2023, after the monkeypox outbreak had taken hold in the U.S., Daskalakis went on national television to let the country know that his team was ‘making sure [they] got the word out in a way that supports people’s joy, as opposed to calling them risky.’

‘You know, one person’s idea of risk, is another person’s idea of a great festival or Friday night, for that matter. So, we have to sort of embrace that with joy and make sure that folks know how to keep themselves safe,’ the Biden monkeypox coordinator added.

 

Meanwhile, during the outbreak, Daskalkis posted a tweet from gay sex app Grindr that stated ‘Dr. Daskalakis could jab me any day,’ with a sticker of a flattered cat.

In other social media posts from around the same time, Daskalkis can be seen using male models wearing leather bondage straps to make an entrance at an HIV prevention summit. 

While in his role at the White House leading the monkeypox response, Daskalkis also reportedly ran an STD screening operation from an after-hours sex club in New York City. When asked about the operation in an interview, Daskalakis described it as ‘exciting’ and added there was ‘not much sleep time.’ Later in the interview, he added: ‘I’d already kind of been the bathhouse HIV testing doctor.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Daskalakis about the juxtaposition between his criticism of Kennedy’s policies not reflecting ‘scientific reality,’ and his role in the Biden administration’s approach to monkeypox, but did not receive an immediate response.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

It’s been a busy week for Cracker Barrel Old Country Store’s marketing team.

The restaurant chain announced a rebrand and new logo last week, faced widespread criticism from social media users, including President Donald Trump, and proceeded to walk back its plan to change the logo.

In that span of time, the company lost and regained almost $100 million in market value, bringing it about back to where it started. The stock gained 8% on Wednesday.

The Cracker Barrel saga is just the latest example of a consumer-facing company making big branding decisions, then pulling back after alienating its customer base.

“It’s very tricky to be a brand for everyone today,” Carreen Winters, president of reputation at the global public relations firm MikeWorldWide, said in an interview. “Legacy brands are particularly tricky, because you have to figure out what is cherished and authentic from the old and marry it with the new.

“In Cracker Barrel’s case, they’re trying to attract a new, younger customer [which] is no longer sufficient,” she continued. “You need to actually think about all of your stakeholders and how they will react, respond, feel about what you’re doing or the direction you’re taking. And you need to be sure that what you’re doing is consistent with shared values.”

Rebranding failures are not a new phenomenon. One of the most famous marketing blunders of all time happened in 1985 when the Coca-Cola company introduced “New Coke” with a new formula. After a firestorm of outrage from its customers, the company returned to its classic formula a few months later.

But social media has made backlash from consumers faster and more widespread, meaning businesses are usually quicker to walk back on their branding failures.

In 2010, retailer Gap ditched its decades-old blue box logo for a more minimalist design. It faced intense backlash on social media through thousands of engagements and, within less than a week, the company said it was reverting to its original logo.

More recently in May, Warner Bros. Discovery announced its streaming platform would undergo another name change, after switching from HBO to HBO Max to Max and then back again to HBO Max.

Major rebrands don’t always go awry. For example, Kentucky Fried Chicken successfully rebranded to KFC in 1991. Its customers already used the acronym and the rebrand signified that the restaurant chain offers more than just fried chicken.

Dunkin’ Donuts also successfully underwent its name change to Dunkin’ in 2019. It did face some criticism from its loyal customers at the time, but Winters said today the “Dunkin’” name and branding are widely accepted over its original name.

“Dunkin’ rebranded in accordance with the behavior that the customer created,” she said. “It aligned with their strategy of being more than Donuts and really building their coffee business.”

She also mentioned IHOP as an example of a brand that has been able to freshen up its look and stay relevant in culture. She said IHOP’s change has been an “evolution, not a revolution.”

Beth LaGuardia Cooper, chief marketing officer at Advantage, The Authority Company, added during an interview that Starbucks had subtle changes to its logo over time, which allowed it to hold the base of its identity close.

While some social media users disliked Cracker Barrel’s new branding simply because they said it lacked substance and was too “sterile” or “soulless,” others, especially conservatives, claimed the new logo leaned into “wokeness” and diversity efforts.

Cracker Barrel is widely considered a classic American restaurant chain. It began in Tennessee in 1969 and its branding evokes Southern charm and nostalgia for its consumer base.

Eric Schiffer, chairman of the firm Reputation Management Consultants, said the new branding, without the iconic “Uncle Herschel” figure, suggested to conservatives that having a white man featured on the logo was wrong or politically incorrect.

He said that pushback represents a larger trend where conservatives are feeling under attack by diversity, equity and inclusion efforts.

“I think the perspective of conservatives is, don’t ruin Cracker Barrel with the Bud Light meets Jaguar marketing playbook,” said Schiffer, adding that those brands “attempted to disrupt positively and what they did was they nuked brand sentiment and shareholder confidence.”

In November, Tata Motors-owned Jaguar Land Rover announced a rebrand that removed its “leaper” big cat imagery from its logo and changed the brand’s font. Its new promotional materials included brightly dressed models, but no cars. The brand faced significant pushback, including tens of thousands of responses on social media.

Elon Musk criticized the company on X at the time, asking Jaguar’s official account: “Do you sell cars?”

Earlier this month, Trump piped in with his insults, calling Jaguar’s ad campaign “stupid” and “seriously WOKE.”

The Telegraph reported in May that Jaguar was searching for a new advertising agency after the public backlash.

Similarly, Anheuser-Busch InBev’s Bud Light faced heavy criticism from conservatives in 2023 after a collaboration between the beer brand and social influencer Dylan Mulvaney, who is transgender.

“If you’re trying to be a tough, male-focused, football fan-oriented beer, the last thing you want to do is put the wrong spokesperson in front of the brand,” Schiffer said. “It will turn off that audience and it allows competitors to capture that market share.”

“The throughline in all of this is, don’t rip apart and disrespect audiences that brought you to the dance,” Schiffer said. “Find a way, if you’re going to want to expand, do it in a way that doesn’t cut at the core of what the brand stands for — and in the process, create cognitive dissonance and blow up market cap.”

Branding experts told CNBC that at the end of the day, people are talking about Cracker Barrel, which is a win for the company by itself.

“Everybody loves a comeback in America,” LaGuardia Cooper said. “So I would root for them to make this happen, make something good out of it.”

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

The de minimis exemption, an obscure trade law provision that has simultaneously fueled and eroded businesses across the globe, officially came to an end on Friday following an executive order by President Donald Trump.

For nearly a decade, shipments valued under $800 were allowed to enter the country virtually duty free and with less oversight. Now, those shipments from the likes of Tapestry, Lululemon and just about any other retailer with an online presence will be tariffed and processed in the same way that larger packages are handled.

In May, Trump ended the exemption for goods coming from China and Hong Kong, and on July 30 he expanded the rollback to all countries, calling it a “catastrophic loophole” that’s been used to evade tariffs and get “unsafe or below-market” products into the U.S.

The de minimis exemption had previously been slated to end in July 2027 as part of sweeping legislation passed by Congress, but Trump’s executive order eliminated the provision much sooner, giving businesses, customs officials and postal services less time to prepare.

“The ending of that under-$800-per-person-per-day rule, from a global perspective, is about to probably cause a bit of pandemonium,” said Lynlee Brown, a partner in the global trade division at accounting firm EY. “There’s a financial implication, there’s an operational implication, and then there’s pure compliance, right? Like, these have all been informal entries. No one’s really looked at them.”

Already, the sudden change has snarled supply chains from France to Singapore and led post offices across the world to temporarily suspend shipments to the U.S. so they can ensure their systems are updated and able to comply with the new regulations.

It’s forced businesses both large and small to rethink not just their supply chains, but their overall business models, because of the impact the change could have on their bottom lines — setting off a panic in board rooms across the country, logistics experts said.

“Obviously it’s a big change for operating models for companies, not just the Sheins and the Temus, but for companies that have historically had e-com and brick-and-mortar stores,” Brown said.

The change also means consumers, already are under pressure from persistent inflation and high interest rates, could now see even higher prices on a wide range of goods, from Colombian bathing suits to specialty ramen subscription boxes shipped straight from Japan.

The end of de minimis could cost U.S. consumers at least $10.9 billion, or $136 per family, according to a 2025 paper by Pablo Fajgelbaum and Amit Khandelwal for the National Bureau of Economic Research. The research found low-income and minority consumers would feeling the biggest impact as they rely more on the cheaper, imported purchases.

Popularized by Chinese e-tailers Shein and Temu, use of the de minimis exemption has exploded in the last decade, ballooning from 134 million shipments in 2015 to over 1.36 billion in 2024. Prior to the recent change to limit its use, U.S. Customs and Border Protection said it was processing over 4 million de minimis shipments into the country each day.

A 2023 House report found more than 60% of de minimis shipments in 2021 came from China, but because the packages require less information than larger containers, very little information is known about their origins and the types of goods they contain. That opacity is one of the key reasons why both former President Joe Biden and Trump sought to curtail or end the exemption.

Both administrations have said the exemption was overused and abused and that it’s made it difficult for CBP officials to target and block illegal or unsafe shipments coming into the U.S. because the packages aren’t subject to the same level of scrutiny as larger containers.

“We didn’t have any compliance information … on those shipments, and then that is where the danger of drugs and whatnot being in those shipments” comes in, said Irina Vaysfeld, a principal in KPMG’s trade and customs practice.

The Biden administration particularly focused on how the exemption allowed goods made with forced labor to make it into the country in violation of the Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act. Meanwhile, Trump has said the exemption has been used to ship fentanyl and other synthetic opioids into the U.S. In a fact sheet published on July 30, the White House said 90% of all cargo seizures in fiscal 2024, including 98% of narcotics seizures and 97% of intellectual property rights seizures, originated as de minimis shipments.

Across the globe, it’s common for countries to allow low-value shipments to be imported duty-free as a means to streamline and facilitate global trade, but typically, it’s for packages valued around $200, not $800, said EY’s Brown.

Until 2016, the U.S.’s threshold for low-value shipments was also $200, but it was changed to $800 when Congress passed the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act, which sought to benefit businesses, U.S. consumers and the overall U.S. economy, according to the Congressional Research Service. It said higher thresholds provide a “significant economic benefit” to both business and shoppers and thus, the overall economy.

While well-intentioned, the law came with unintended consequences, said Brown.

The “rise in value, from $200 to $800, just made it kind of like a free for all to say, OK, everything come in,” she said.

Eventually companies designed supply chains around the exemption: They set up bonded warehouses, where duties can be deferred prior to export, in places like Canada and Mexico and then imported goods in bulk to those regions before sending them across the border one by one, duty free, as customer orders rolled in, said Brown.

“Companies have really laid out their supply chain in a very specific way [around de minimis] and that’s really the crux of the issue,” said KPMG’s Vaysfeld. “The way that the supply chain has been laid out now may need to change.”

Until the rise of Shein and Temu, the de minimis exemption was rarely discussed in retail circles. Soon, the e-commerce behemoths began facing widespread criticism for their use of what many called a loophole.

In 2023, the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party released a report on Shein and Temu and said the two companies were “likely responsible for more than 30 percent of all packages shipped to the United States daily under the de minimis provision, and likely nearly half of all de minimis shipments to the U.S. from China.”

The revelation sparked widespread consternation among retail executives, lobbyists and government officials who said the companies’ use of the exemption was unfair competition.

However, behind closed doors, companies large and small began mimicking the same model after realizing how it could reduce the steep costs that come along with selling goods online.

Direct-to-consumer companies that only have online presences have relied on it more heavily, so much so that their businesses may not work without it, said Vaysfeld.

“Some of the companies we’ve spoken to, they’ve modeled out, if the tariffs continue for one year, for two years, how does that impact their profitability, and they know how long they can last,” said Vaysfeld. “These aren’t the huge companies, right? These are the smaller companies … Depending on what country they’re sourcing from or where they’re manufacturing, it could really impact their profitability that they can’t stay in business for the long term.”

While smaller, digital companies are more exposed, “pretty much most companies that you can think of” had been using the exemption in some form before it ended, said Vaysfeld.

Take Coach and Kate Spade’s parent company Tapestry: About 13% to 14% of the company’s sales were previously covered under de minimis and will now be subject to a 30% tariff, according to an estimate by equity research firm Barclays.

On the company’s earnings call earlier this month, Chief Financial Officer Scott Roe said tariffs will hit its profits by a total of $160 million this year, including the impact of the end of de minimis. That amounts to about 2.3% of margin headwind, he said.

Shares of the company fell nearly 16% the day that Tapestry reported the profit hit.

In a statement, Roe said Tapestry used de minimis to help support its strong online business, adding it is a practice that “many companies with sophisticated supply chains have been doing for years.”

To help offset its termination, he said Tapestry is looking for ways to reduce costs and is leaning on its manufacturing footprint across many different countries.

Canadian retailer Lululemon is another company that uses de minimis, according to Wells Fargo. Last week, the bank cut its price target on the company’s stock from $225 to $205, citing the end of de minimis. In the note, Wells Fargo analyst Ike Boruchow said the equity research firm sees a potential 90 cent to $1.10 headwind to Lululemon’s earnings per share from the de minimis elimination.

Lululemon declined to comment, citing the company’s quiet period ahead of its reporting earnings.

The National Retail Federation, the industry’s largest trade organization, has not taken a position in favor of or against the exemption. It has members who both supported and opposed the policy, said Jonathan Gold, vice president of supply chain and customs policy at NRF.

Retailers of all sizes, including independent sellers with digital storefronts, have used the approach as “a convenient way to get products to the consumer” for less, Gold said.

“Their costs are going to go up and those costs could be passed on to the consumer at the end of the day,” Gold said.

The most acute impact of the end of de minimis is expected to be felt on online marketplaces where millions of small businesses sell goods like Etsy, eBay and Shopify and used de minimis to defray costs when sending online orders from other parts of the globe to the U.S.

American shoppers have gotten used to buying artwork, coffee mugs, T-shirts and other items from merchants outside the country without paying duties. With that tariff exemption gone, consumers could face higher costs and a more limited selection of items to choose from.

Etsy, eBay and some other retailers sought to defend the loophole prior to its removal, submitting public comments on proposed de minimis regulation by the CBP. An eBay public policy executive said the company was concerned that restrictions to de minimis “would impose significant burdens on American consumers and importers.”

Etsy’s head of public policy, Jeffrey Zubricki, said the artisan marketplace supports “smart U.S. de minimis reform,” but that it was wary of changes that could “disproportionately affect small American sellers.”

“These exemptions are a powerful tool that help small creators, artisans and makers participate in and navigate cross-border trade,” Zubricki wrote in a March letter to CBP.

An Etsy spokesperson declined to comment on the policy change. Etsy CFO Lanny Baker said at a Bernstein conference in May that transactions between U.S. buyers and European sellers comprise about 25% of the company’s gross merchandise sales.

EBay didn’t immediately provide a comment in response to a request from CNBC. The company warned in its latest earnings report that the end of de minimis outside of China could impact its guidance, though CEO Jamie Iannone told CNBC in July that he believes eBay is generally “well suited” to navigate the shifting trade environment.

Some eBay and Etsy sellers based in the UK, Canada and other countries are temporarily closing off their businesses to the U.S. as they work out a plan to navigate the higher tariffs. Blair Nadeau, who owns a Canadian bridal accessories company, was forced to take that step this week.

“This is devastating on so many levels and millions of small businesses worldwide are now having their careers, passions and livelihoods threatened,” Nadeau wrote in an Instagram post on Tuesday. “Just this past hour I have had to turn away two U.S. customers and it broke my heart.”

Nadeau sells her bespoke wedding veils, jewelry and hair adornments through her own website and on Etsy, where 70% of her customer base is in the U.S. The de minimis provision had been a “lifeline” for many Canadian businesses to get their products in the hands of American consumers, Nadeau said in an interview.

“This is really hitting me,” Nadeau said. “It’s like all of a sudden 70% of your salary has been removed overnight.”

In the absence of de minimis, online merchants are faced with either paying import charges upfront and potentially passing those costs on to shoppers through price hikes, or shipping products “delivery duty unpaid,” in which case it’s the customer’s responsibility to pay any duties upon arrival.

Alexandra Birchmore, an artist based in the Cotswolds region of England, said she expects to raise the price of her oil paintings on Etsy by 10% as a result of paying the duties upfront.

“At the moment every small business forum I am on is in chaos about this,” Birchmore said. “It looks to me to be a disaster where no one benefits.”

The disruption could end up being a boon for the likes of Amazon and Walmart. U.S. consumers may turn to major retailers if they face steeper prices elsewhere, as well as potential shipping delays due to backlogs or other issues at the border.

Amazon, in particular, has already proven resilient after the U.S. axed the de minimis provision for shipments from China and Hong Kong in May. The company’s sales increased 13% in the three-month period that ended June 30, compared with 10% growth in the prior quarter. Amazon’s unit sales grew 12%, an acceleration from the first quarter.

Both Amazon and Walmart have fulfillment operations in the U.S. that allow overseas businesses to ship items in bulk and store them in the companies’ warehouses before they’re dispatched to shoppers. Shein and Temu largely eschewed the model in the past in favor of the de minimis exception, but they’ve since moved to open more warehouses in the U.S. in the wake of rising tariffs.

Since the exemption ended on Chinese imports in May, the impact on Shein and Temu has been swift. Temu was forced to change its business model in the U.S. and stop shipping products to American consumers from Chinese factories.

The end of de minimis, as well as Trump’s new tariffs on Chinese imports, also forced Temu to raise prices, reign in its aggressive online advertising push and adjust which goods were available to American shoppers.

The Financial Times reported on Tuesday that Temu has resumed shipping goods to the U.S. from Chinese factories and will also increase its advertising spend following what it called a “truce” between Washington and Beijing.

Temu didn’t return a request for comment.

Meanwhile, Shein has been forced to raise prices and daily active users on both platforms in the U.S. have fallen since the de minimis loophole was closed, CNBC previously reported. Temu’s U.S. daily active users plunged 52% in May versus March, while Shein’s were down 25%, according to data shared with CNBC by market intelligence firm Sensor Tower.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Spirit Airlines on Friday filed for bankruptcy protection, just months after the budget carrier failed to secure better financial footing when it came out of Chapter 11 protection in March.

The Dania Beach, Florida-based airline said under this bankruptcy, it will reduce its network and shrink its fleet, cuts that it said will reduce costs by “hundreds of millions of dollars” a year.

In a release, Spirit said guests can continue to book, travel and use tickets, credits and loyalty points. Wages and benefits will continue to be paid and honored, including contractors, it said. Spirit intends to pay vendors and suppliers for goods and services provided on or after the filing date in the ordinary course.

“Since emerging from our previous restructuring, which was targeted exclusively on reducing Spirit’s funded debt and raising equity capital, it has become clear that there is much more work to be done and many more tools are available to best position Spirit for the future,” Spirit CEO Dave Davis said in a news release on Friday.

Spirit had just gotten out of bankruptcy in March after four months, only to be dragged down by continued high costs and weaker U.S. domestic demand. The carrier had struggled for years as it dealt with a glut of U.S. flights, a Pratt & Whitney engine recall and a failed takeover by JetBlue Airways, a deal that was blocked in court.

Firms that used Spirit’s aircrafts had reached out to rival airlines in recent weeks to gauge executives’ interest in some of the carrier’s planes, according to people familiar with the matter.

Spirit is the United States’ largest budget airline, followed closely by rival Frontier Airlines which has tried and failed to merge with Spirit repeatedly since 2022. Frontier on Tuesday announced 20 new routes that compete with Spirit to win over its struggling competitor’s customers.

This post appeared first on NBC NEWS

Genetics is the study of genes, their variations and hereditary characteristics, as well as how these traits are passed on through generations. So what is genetics investing?

When it comes to genetics investing, companies in this niche of the life science sector are mostly focused on four submarkets: DNA sequencing, genetic testing, gene therapy and genomics, which includes gene editing.

This life sciences submarket has gained much attention from investors over the past several years. It has provided a launching pad for a number of biotech firms developing and commercializing novel treatments and drugs addressing a wide range of diseases with unmet needs.

For those looking to dive into the genetics sector, there are numerous investment opportunities to consider. Investing in gene stocks is the most common route, but there are risks due to the market’s volatility, especially when it comes to wins or losses with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

Exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are another popular option for gaining exposure to the industry, and come with less risk than investing in a single stock.

In this article

    What are the key areas of the genetics sector?

    Before diving into investment opportunities in the genetics market, it’s important to understand the industry and the key areas of genetics mentioned above.

      What investors should know about the genetics market

      In the biotech sector, gene therapy is one of the more advanced treatment options, and gene therapy pipeline candidates are robust in late-stage clinical trials.

      In terms of what will — and already has — disrupted the genetics industry, CRISPR gene-editing technology has been on the rise for quite some time. It uses short repeating DNA sequences with “spacers” dividing them to treat genetic diseases.

      While the use of the technology is still in its early stages, in the coming years it’s expected to have a big impact on how genetic diseases are treated, and there are a range of clinical trials underway involving CRISPR technology. So far, the only FDA approved CRISPR-based medicine is Casgevy, developed by Vertex Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ:VRTX) and CRISPR Therapeutics (NASDAQ:CRSP). It was originally approved in late 2023 for the treatment of sickle cell disease.

      The prominence of gene therapies in the life science sector was a major theme at the 2025 JPMorgan Healthcare Conference in January 2025. Peter Marks, then-director of the FDA’s Center for Biological Evaluation and Research, told attendees that his agency is aiming to accelerate approvals for gene therapies.

      In 2024, the FDA expanded approvals for CRISPR-based Casgevy to beta-thalassemia, and it also approved Pfizer’s (NYSE:PFE) Beqvez and PTC Therapeutics’ (NASDAQ:PTC) Kebilidi.

      Despite experiencing a challenging year in 2024, there is still a lot of optimism in the gene therapy sector. Also speaking at the January conference, Alliance for Regenerative Medicine president Tim Hunt said he believes 10 new cell and gene therapy treatments could reach blockbuster status by 2030.

      “No one’s saying there aren’t headwinds, but we are seeing important signs of growth,” he added.

      Looking at DNA sequencing, this market is driven by advances in biotech, the increasing prevalence of cancer and rising demand for precision medicine, as well as higher investment in research and development. DNA sequencing has become a vital component of this growth and has played a key role in remodeling molecular biology and genomics research.

      Genetic testing is another segment of the genetics industry that is growing at a fast pace. Unsurprisingly, technological breakthroughs have had a huge impact on genetic testing, and so has the fact that governments and regulatory bodies are turning their attention to this market in order to regulate and raise awareness to treat diseases such as cancer, cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia.

      Biotech and pharmaceutical companies are also expressing interest in this sector, which is expected to further fuel genetics sector growth in the coming years. Mergers and acquisitions activity is also expected to increase as companies seek to expand their product portfolios new candidates and technologies.

      As can be seen, the genetics industry is vast and complex, but is also ripe with investment opportunities.

      How to invest in gene stocks

      Investors looking to invest in the field of genetics through stocks have many options, from large-cap biotech companies to pure-play gene therapy, gene editing and genetic testing stocks.

      See the list below for genetics companies to consider, and check out the linked stock lists for more options.

      Large-cap gene stocks

      There are a number of large-cap biotech companies that have significant focuses on the field of genomics. Here are a few to consider:

      Amgen (NASDAQ:AMGN)
      A global leader in biotech, Amgen uses advanced human genetics to develop and manufacture therapeutics targeting a variety of diseases with unmet medical needs. The company’s subsidiary deCODE Genetics is researching how human genetic diversity influences disease.

      AbbVie (NYSE:ABBV)
      Research-based global biopharmaceutical company AbbVie that addresses several key therapeutic areas: immunology, oncology, neuroscience, eye care, virology and gastroenterology. AbbVie is collaborating with ADARx Pharmaceuticals to develop siRNA therapeutics, viewed as a promising genetic medicine approach for silencing disease-causing genes.

      Regeneron Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ:REGN)
      Regeneron Pharmaceuticals creates medicines for a wide variety of diseases. The Regeneron Genetics Center is conducting one of the world’s largest genetics sequencing efforts in collaboration with health organizations around the world.

      Gene editing (CRISPR) stocks

      There are a variety of options for investors looking to buy in on the field of gene editing stocks, including:

      CRISPR Therapeutics (NASDAQ:CRSP)
      CRISPR Therapeutics and its partner Vertex Pharmaceuticals co-developed drug Casgevy, a CRISPR/Cas9 genome-edited cell therapy. Casgevy is the first ever treatment based on CRISPR technology to be approved for the US market, as well as by the European Medicines Agency and Health Canada.

      Intellia Therapeutics (NASDAQ:NTLA)
      Intellia Therapeutics is a gene editing biotech company developing drugs for patients with genetic and autoimmune diseases. The company’s drug pipeline includes late-stage clinical programs for therapies targeting hereditary angioedema and transthyretin amyloidosis.

      Vertex Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ:VRTX)
      Vertex Pharmaceuticals is the other half of the team behind Casgevy. It also offers exposure to other sectors of genomics, with approved treatments for cystic fibrosis and a pipeline of genetic and cell therapies. Its investigational VX-880 islet cell replacement therapy could restore insulin production in patients with type 1 diabetes.

      Gene therapy stocks

      Gene therapy stocks and stem cell stocks are also popular choices for genetics investing. Here are a few to get you started:

      Novartis (NYSE:NVS)
      Switzerland-based Novartis is focused on treatments for a wide range of diseases, including cancers, malaria, leprosy and sickle cell disease. Novartis is developing adeno-associated-virus (AAV)-based and CRISPR-based gene therapies. Its Kymriah treatment was the first CAR-T cell therapy to be approved by the FDA, and the agency also approved its AAV-based therapy Zolgensma.

      Gilead Sciences (NASDAQ:GILD)
      Global biopharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences is advancing breakthrough medicines to prevent and treat serious diseases such as HIV, viral hepatitis and cancer. Its cell-based gene medicine for blood cancer, the CAR T-cell therapy Yescarta, was the second gene therapy approved by FDA.

      uniQure (NASDAQ:QURE)
      Genomic medicine company uniQure develops and markets gene therapy products for patients with severe genetic diseases. The company’s AAV-based gene therapy platform targets liver-directed and central nervous system disorders.

      Genetic testing stocks

      For those interested in genetic testing stocks, these three stocks provide a snapshot on different ways to get exposure to the sector:

      Exact Sciences (NASDAQ:EXAS)
      Exact Sciences focuses on molecular diagnostic tests. The company has developed a molecular screening technology platform called Cologuard that detects a range of cancers, including breast cancer and colorectal cancer.

      Fulgent Genetics (NASDAQ:FLGT)
      A leader in clinical diagnostic genetic sequencing, Fulgent Genetics is a full-service genomics testing company. Its proprietary technology platform, Picture Genetics, allows for the identification of personal DNA health markers in individual patients.

      Illumina (NASDAQ:ILMN)
      Illumina develops, manufactures and markets life science tools and integrated systems that enable the implementation of genomic solutions for the healthcare sector. Its focus is on oncology testing, genetic disease testing, reproductive health and research.

      How to invest in genomics ETFs

      For those who would prefer to invest in the genetics industry overall rather than buying shares in an individual gene stock, investing in genomics ETFs is the way to go. Here are some available ETFs that offer exposure to companies in the biotech and genetics sectors to start you off:

      ARK Genomic Revolution ETF (ARCA:ARKG)
      This ETF tracks firms focused on CRISPR technology, targeted therapeutics, bioinformatics, molecular diagnostics, stem cells and agricultural biology. Its holdings include CRISPR Therapeutics and Guardant Health (NASDAQ:GH).

      Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF (NASDAQ:GNOM)
      The Global X Genomics & Biotechnology ETF invests in stocks that are involved in genomic science, which includes gene computational genomics and biotechnology. Its holdings include Illumina and Avidity Biosciences (NASDAQ:RNA).

      iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF (ARCA:IDNA)
      The iShares Genomics Immunology and Healthcare ETF focuses on companies involved with genomics, immunology and bioengineering. Its holdings include Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Arcellx (NASDAQ:ACLX).

      Securities Disclosure: I, Melissa Pistilli, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

      This post appeared first on investingnews.com