As millennials start to hit middle age—and boomers near their 80s—the number of Americans caring for both older and younger generations is poised to surge
4 min
At 34, Kait Giordano is juggling her job, a newborn and two parents with dementia.
Just over a month into motherhood, she tends to her infant son and her live-in parents in the morning and afternoon, some days with the help of a rotating cast of paid companions at their Tucker, Ga., home. In the evenings, her husband, Tamrin, takes over while she colours hair.
They had already delayed starting a family when Kait’s father moved in a few years ago. Her mother moved in this year. “We chose to take this on,” she says. “We didn’t want to wait any longer.”
More Americans shoulder a double load of caring for their children and at least one adult , often a parent. The “sandwich generation” has grown to at least 11 million in the U.S., according to one estimate, and shifts in demographics, costs and work are making it a longer and tougher slog.
People are having children later, and they are living longer , often with care-intensive conditions such as dementia. That means many are taking care of elderly parents when their own kids are still young and require more intensive parenting—and for longer stretches of their lives than previous generations of sandwiched caregivers.
As the oldest millennials start to hit middle age —and baby boomers near their 80s—the number of Americans caring for older and younger family makes up a significant part of the electorate. Vice President Kamala Harris invoked the sandwich generation when she recently proposed expanding Medicare benefits to cover home healthcare.
“There are so many people in our country who are right in the middle,” the Democratic presidential candidate said on ABC’s “The View” this month. “It’s just almost impossible to do it all, especially if they work.”
Responding to the Harris proposal, former President Donald Trump ’s campaign said he would give priority to home-care benefits by shifting resources to at-home senior care and provide tax credits to support unpaid family caregivers.
The growing burden on this sandwich generation weakens careers and quality of life, and has ramifications for society at large. It is a drag on monthly budgets and long-term financial health.
A 40-something contributing $1,500 a month over five years to support an aging parent stands to lose more than $1 million in retirement savings, according to an analysis by Steph Wagner , national director of women and wealth at Northern Trust Wealth Management.
“It’s become incredibly expensive to manage the longevity that we’ve created,” says Bradley Schurman , an author and demographic strategist, who says that the demands of caring for older generations could push more people in midlife to retreat from the workforce, particularly women. “That’s a massive risk for the U.S. economy.”
Not too long ago, the typical sandwich caregiver was a woman in her late 40s with teenage kids and maybe a part-time job. Now, according to a 2023 AARP report, the average age of these caregivers is 44, and a growing share are men. Nearly a third are millennials and Gen Z. They are in the critical early-to-middle stages of their careers and three-quarters of them work full or part time.
Diana Fuller, 49, says being the go-to person for her 83-year-old mother’s care for more than four years has been stressful, even with her mother now living in a nearby, $10,000-a month memory-care centre in Charlotte., N.C. (Long-term-care insurance covers 75%; the rest is paid out of her mother’s savings.)
She has put on the back burner career goals such as ramping up the leg warmer business she started with her sister. She has missed moments such as her 9-year-old son’s school holiday concert last year because of her mother’s frequent hospital stays.
Her husband picks up a lot of the child care duties when her mom is in the hospital. Still, she says, “it often feels like everything is about to implode.”
The financial pressures are also growing for the sandwich generation. According to a Care.com survey of 2,000 parents, 60% of U.S. families spent 20% or more of their annual household income on child care last year, up from 51% of families in 2021. Meanwhile, the median cost of a home health aide climbed 10% last year to $75,500, data from long-term-care insurer Genworth Financial show.
Caregivers often risk paying for such costs in their own old age, financial advisers say. More than half reported in a 2023 New York Life survey that they had made a sacrifice to their own financial security to provide care for their parents on top of their children.
Many in the sandwich generation say they feel torn between the needs of their kids and parents. Liam Davitt , a public-relations professional, and his wife, Lisa Fels Davitt , recently moved from their Washington, D.C., condo to suburban New Jersey so that their 7-year-old son could be closer to cousins and go to a good public school. (They had previously paid for private school.)
That meant moving away from his 84-year-old mother in an independent living community. The long distance has made helping her even with little things more complicated, such as troubleshooting glitches with her iPhone. He recently enlisted a nearby fraternity brother to help her assemble a new walker.
An avid runner, he says he finds himself taking care of himself—avoiding potentially ankle-twisting mud runs and keeping up with his doctors’ appointments, for example—out of fear he won’t be able to care for his younger and older family.
“If all of a sudden I’m less mobile, then I’m more of a burden on my own family” says Davitt. He is planning to move his mother closer by.
The Giordanos, in Georgia, have made adjustments, too. With their newborn keeping them busy, they installed cameras and door chimes to help monitor Kait’s parents.
Her parents enjoy pushing their grandson in the stroller around the house while supervised, she says. When Tamrin comes home from work, he gives his in-laws dinner and medications while holding the baby.
The couple isn’t sure when they’ll have another child, which would require paying for more help.
“We may have to wait,” Kait said. “We’re very much living in the moment.”
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
The Australian leather house has opened an immersive four-day pop-up in Manhattan, unveiling its Bloom Collection and redefining what a product launch can look like.
Following the successful launch of its Palais Collection, MAISON de SABRÉ has unveiled a new modular handbag system offering more than 720 styling combinations.
Wall Street’s hottest momentum trade has reversed sharply, as former winners tumble and heavily shorted stocks surge.
3 min
Wall Street’s hottest trade has gone ice cold.
For years, it paid off to buy stocks that were rising in price—and bet against struggling shares. The momentum trade was especially profitable this year, as investors piled into hot stocks including Micron Technology, Nvidia, Advanced Micro Devices and other artificial-intelligence darlings while wagering against those likely to be hurt by the embrace of AI.
The S&P 500 Momentum Index soared 44% in the second quarter, its best quarterly performance on record, and it surged 133% over the past five years, nearly double the broad market’s performance.
Mega funds and rookie investors alike piled into the trade, some using leverage and options contracts in an effort to amplify their returns, propelling the underlying shares higher.
“It is a self-fulfilling prophecy,” said Matthew Tym, managing director at Cantor Fitzgerald, of the trade.
Suddenly, the trade is a loser. The momentum index has tumbled more than 9% since July 1, lagging behind the S&P 500’s 2.8% gain. The index—which tracks stocks in the S&P 500 based on a “momentum score”—is on track for the biggest quarterly underperformance in 25 years. July was the second-worst month for the momentum trade in around 40 years, according to Bank of America estimates; the only month worse was April 2009, in the teeth of the global financial crisis.
Hedge funds that bought momentum shares while shorting low-momentum stocks suffered even more. At the same time, a basket of the most popular stocks held by hedge funds tracked by Goldman Sachs recorded its biggest one-month underperformance in July relative to the S&P 500 in more than 20 years, according to the bank’s analysts.
Momentum trading is based on a rather simple observation: Investments that go up tend to keep outperforming; those that underperform often remain laggards. This kind of trading might seem too simple a stock-picking strategy to work. Yet it often has.
“For decades, it didn’t take a lot of sophistication to run a momentum strategy and make a decent living at it,” says Agustin Lebron, senior researcher at EquiLibre, a trading firm.
Part of the reason: It takes a while for corporate and other information to spread to various investors, so they slowly build positions, producing buying momentum.
“A huge pension fund can’t flip around its positions in a day,” says Lebron. “Behavioral biases also account for some of the effect, as well—people tend to sell their winners too early and hold losers too long.”
Fans of the strategy point to the human tendency to extrapolate from past results—and chase investment returns—noting that momentum patterns have been evident in markets for decades, even centuries. They also say that some of the worst months for momentum strategies are during longer periods of outperformance.
Some have been doing the trade by buying the strongest investments in a sector while shorting the weakest; others lean in to rising markets or asset classes. Still others use a quantitative approach or turn to banks or others who sell ways to make distinct wagers on momentum as a “tradable factor” or a “thematic basket.”
The fans remain believers. “Any strategy has disappointing periods,” says Antti Ilmanen, global co-head of the portfolio solutions group at AQR Capital Management.
The surge in Moderna and other biotech stocks helped crush the momentum trade. These shares were among the most heavily shorted in recent years, but positive news on a cancer vaccine from Moderna and Merck sent those stocks flying, crushing some quant and other hedge funds. Moderna is up around 150% so far this month.
These traders had an especially rough day on Aug. 19, which Goldman Sachs told its clients was the worst day for “systematic long-short managers” in more than two years. About half of the losses were because of momentum trades, the bank said.
Some traders have begun to short, or bet against, the very stocks that propelled the momentum trade earlier this year. Net short positions in futures tied to the Nasdaq-100 index among speculators recently climbed to some of the highest levels of the past two decades, according to data from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The about-face is a sign of how markets have become more treacherous for investors, even as indexes keep climbing. Part of the issue: the recent meltdown of Situational Awareness, a hedge fund that had piled into some of the most popular momentum shares, including chip stocks. After a period of market tumult, Nvidia shares rocketed almost 9% after its earnings, showing how quickly sentiment can shift.
Some investors say the run-up in share prices driving tech stocks higher reminds them at times of the dot-com frenzy decades ago.
Mike Ogborne, the founder of San Francisco-based Ogborne Capital Management, said he has grown more cautious on technology stocks and is keeping more of his portfolio in cash than he typically does.
And he is nervous about the surge in spending by technology giants and quarterly capital expenditures that keep rising.
“It is a little bit like Cinderella and the clock striking midnight. You don’t know when midnight is going to come around,” Ogborne said. “They don’t send a memo around telling you when the capex cycle is over.”
