Meet the #Girlboss Who Is Helping Women Invest Smarter

One of our major goals for 2016 was to start taking ownership of our finances. But breaking bad money habits and trying to save money is tougher than we originally thought — even with all the awesome millennial-focused finance podcasts we queued up in our iPhones.

B+C: In an interview with Forbes, you said, “This is my Gloria Steinem moment.” Why did you choose to create a women-only investment platform as your passion project?

SK: I never really considered myself much of a feminist until I left Wall Street. I did all the right things — such as put together gender-diverse teams — but feminism wasn’t deep in my bones. It wasn’t until I took some time off and had some space that I realized that the investing industry has been, frankly, “by men, for men” — and that has historically kept women from achieving their financial goals.

We all know money is power. And we women won’t be equal with men until we are financially equal with men. Given my background on Wall Street (and how very few women there are there), if I’m not going to work to fix this issue, who is? So I’ve made it my life’s mission to unleash women’s financial power and close the gender investing gap.

B+C: Can you explain the concept of the “investment gap?”

SK:Women don’t invest to the same extent that men do. Fewer of us have started saving for retirement, we have saved less overall and we park about 70 percent of our money in cash. This can cost us hundreds of thousands — for some of us, even millions — of dollars over the course of our lives. For some women, this can cost them more than the much-more-discussed gender pay gap.

B+C: Many women, including myself, haven’t seriously thought about investing their money. Why should the everygal consider getting into investing?

SK: Let’s take “Elle” as an example: Elle earns $85,000 a year currently. If she invests 20 percent of her salary in a diversified investment portfolio instead of keeping it in cash, in 40 years “Future Elle” may have a real reason to thank her. That’s because our calculations show that, based on historic markets, Future Elle could have anywhere between $565,000 to $2.1 million more money at that time than if “Today Elle” had kept that money in a savings account.*

You should invest because, quite frankly, investing can be life changing. That doesn’t mean that investing won’t involve some ups and downs (some of which can be stomach-lurchers!), but historically, the risks inherent in investing have resulted in superior returns, over time.

B+C: Why do you feel that women need their own investing platform? How does being gender-exclusive help bridge the gap?

SK: For years, I argued that women absolutely did not need their own investing platform. I thought the concept was vaguely insulting and, for whatever reason, I automatically equated the idea with a “junior varsity” offering. But the very fact that the gender investing gap exists is evidence that something different is needed.

Dig a little deeper, and you can note that the investing industry and most of its tools have been created by men, for men. So the “gender-neutral” investment industry implicitly has defaulted to men’s product preferences and men’s financial characteristics. (One big hint: The industry symbol is a bull — a phallic symbol if one ever existed.)

B+C: When many people think about investing, they picture a long and complicated process that only people with experience and/or education in the field should even attempt.

SK: We know! There are all kinds of myths that keep women from investing. One is that it’s all about math and guys are better at math. (Not true!) Another is that women need more financial education before they can become investors. Well, that’s pretty hard to argue with — almost everyone should be more financially literate. But men will often invest regardless (and have profited from it), while women are less likely to.

When you dig into this issue, it’s that men are more likely to invest through jargon, while women are more likely to slow down, research what the jargon means… and then not invest. That’s why we’ve outlawed investing jargon on our site and built an investing plan that you can complete in less than 30 minutes. Not 30 hours, 30 minutes.

B+C: Say you’re out for coffee with a 20-something woman who wants to start investing but has absolutely NO idea where to start. What advice would you give her?

1. Pay off all high-interest debt. That means if you can’t afford to buy something without putting it on your credit card, don’t buy it. Do not start investing until you do this.

2. Start an emergency fund. Your just-in-case fund should be three to six months of take-home pay, squirreled away in a bank account. Do not start investing until you have some cushion built in the event of an emergency.

3. Start a retirement account. This is particularly the case if your company offers a 401(k) match… in other words, free money.

4. Invest for your goals. Experts say to save or invest up to 20 percent of your salary for all your long-term goals including retirement, buying a home, starting a business and so on. Can’t do 20 percent? Then start with 1 percent, move it up to 2, then 3… you get the picture.

5. Invest regularly. That means something out of every paycheck, if you can. This may help to offset the ups and downs of investing. If you invest regularly, sometimes you’ll be investing when the market is expensive and sometimes when it’s cheap, but historically, it has evened itself out.

Are you investing a portion of your paycheck? Tweet us @BritandCo!

(Photos via Ellevest and Getty)

*See 8 Myths That Hold Women Back From Investing. The projections of various investment outcomes are hypothetical in nature, do not reflect actual investment results, and are not guarantees of future results. Information was obtained from third party sources, which we believe to be reliable but not guaranteed for accuracy or completeness. The information provided should not be relied upon as investment advice or recommendations, does not constitute a solicitation to buy or sell securities and should not be considered specific legal, investment or tax advice. The information provided does not take into account the specific objectives, financial situation or particular needs of any specific person. Diversification does not ensure a profit or protect against a loss in a declining market. There is no guarantee that any particular asset allocation or mix of funds will meet your investment objectives or provide you with a given level of income. Investing entails risk including the possible loss of principal and there is no assurance that the investment will provide positive performance over any period of time.

Saturday Night Live just had a 50th anniversary celebration to remember, but despite some iconic callbacks and celebrity cameos, one moment everyone's talking about didn't really have to do with the sketches at all: Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively's appearance.

During a Q&A with Amy Poehler and Tina Fey, Ryan Reynolds stood up to ask a question, with Blake Lively sitting right beside him. After the SNL icons asked him how he was, the Deadpool actor joked, "Great. Why, what have you heard?" And while the audience laughed at the inferred reference to the ongoing legal battle with Justin Baldoni, sources are saying others aren't so happy with the couple's appearance.

Here's what people are saying about Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively's appearance on the SNL50 special.

Ryan Reynolds & Blake Lively "have no regrets" about their SNL50 special appearance.

Following the special, SNL's cue card guy Wally Feresten told Fifi, Fev and Nick that Ryan “had a different line in rehearsal and he pitched that to replace it. That was his idea."

"We wouldn’t want to do anything too controversial unless they were in on it.”

But according to a Page Six source, Ryan didn't actually come up with that joke. “The opening joke was pitched by SNL and never changed,” they said. “The follow-up joke was rewritten in rehearsal.” So who's really behind the joke? For now, no one (except Ryan) knows.

While the moment with Ryan Reynolds got some laughs, another insider reveals that, "People in Hollywood think Blake and Ryan attending the SNL 50th anniversary show was not a good look," and that it might have been a good idea for the couple to "have sat this one out.”

But even though the appearance got some mixed reviews, another source promises they "have no regrets about making an appearance at the show,” and that they “were two of the last people to leave Studio 8H."

"Blake was initially hesitant to attend the SNL 50th anniversary show but ultimately she’s glad she attended and had a really nice time,” the second source continues. “They’re glad they showed up because they have nothing to hide and no reason not to.”

The SNL50 special, and the brief look at Ryan Reynolds and Blake Lively, came after Blake and Justin Baldoni filed lawsuits against one another — Blake against Justin for alleged sexual harassment and Justin against Blake, Ryan, and the New York Times for defamation.

"It’s very plausible that Justin’s legal team will use this public outing to defend him,” according to the Page Six source. “Justin is taking this lawsuit in all seriousness and isn’t making a public mockery out of it."

Recently, Justin Baldoni published a website with an Amended Complaint and It Ends With Us timeline, but according to First Amendment lawyer Kevin Goldberg, the website is "unnecessary."

"I think it's unusual and I'm not sure it's appropriate once you have already filed a defamation lawsuit," he tells Forbes. "Legally speaking, it's not going to be, itself, relevant as evidence. It could be introduced in evidence but there's no need for it."

"The reason we have very strict standards for anyone who is trying to win a defamation lawsuit — and in particular, a celebrity who is trying to win a defamation lawsuit is they can do things like this," Kevin continues. "Use a website and PR team to restore their reputation, they don't need to use the courts to restore their reputation. So why did he do both is my big question. It seems like his real goal is not to win the lawsuit but restore his good name, just, generally in the public view."

What did you think about Blake Lively & Ryan Reynolds' appearance on the SNL50 special? Read up on 10 Weird Moments You Missed From Viral Justin Baldoni & Blake Lively Set Video for more.

You read that correctly: Tom Brady and Irina Shayk (yes, Bradley Cooper's ex-wife) may be back together. Despite the fact we thought the former pro-football player and Gisele Bündchen were endgame, we discovered some good things don't last forever. But the heartbreak didn't seem to matter once Tom found model Irina Shayk — at least until they broke up for a while.

Imagine everyone's surprise now that the two are allegedly dating again. It's like the tale of the two exes who can't leave each other alone no matter how hard they try. Whether this is good or bad is TBD, but we're intrigued either way!

Here's what to know about Tom Brady & Irina Shayk's potentially rekindled relationship!

Victor Boyko/Getty Images

Page Sixreported Tom Brady and Irina Shayk are rumored to be dating again, per a source. The anonymous person said, "Tom and Irina have started dating each other again and are open to see where things go" which seems extremely vague.

Adding more ambiguity to the will-they-won't-they rumor mill? A second source revealedthat the former couple had "been talking on the phone" around the New Year — and were allegedly planning a trip together — according to Page Six. "Neither one is in a serious relationship right now, so why not take a trip.”

Jane Gershovich/Getty Images

Prior to this, Tom Brady and Irina Shayk only dated for a short time before closing their door on their relationship. TMZ exclusively reported they'd chosen to amicably break up because things simply "fizzled out." According to an earlier Page Six article, the sexy couple were no longer spotted together at different events which raised eyebrows about their dating status.

It's safe to say that Tom Brady & Irina Shayk's "relationship" may have been more of a "situationship" because they were first linked after paparazzi spotted the latter being picked up from Hotel Bel-Air by Brady last summer (via Page Six). The eager photographers must've camped out at Tom's house overnight because they also spotted the two leaving his home the next morning. One can only assumed what happened, but it seems like they reportedly had a date shortly after that (via Page Six).

Beatriz Velasco/Getty Images

The former couple have yet to make public comments about if they're dating or not — they could just be having fun! If either way is the case, we wish them all the luck in the world!

Follow us on Facebook for more celebrity news!

1923 is back! After two years of wondering how Alex and Spencer would find each other after their separation, if Jacob and Cara would survive the attempt to steal their ranch, and if Teonna would make it to safety, the 1923 season 2 premiere is answering some of our biggest questions. Although actress Michelle Randolph told me we might have to wait until the end of the season to see whether the show "fills in some blanks" in the Dutton family tree, we're already getting plenty of info.

Here's everything you missed in the 1923 season 2 premiere, "The Killing Season."

In the '1923' season 2 premiere, Jacob & Cara Dutton are protecting their ranch.

Right at the beginning of the episode, we get a beautiful look at Montana and the Yellowstone ranch, with Cara Dutton revealing via narration they've sold everything except 4 bulls and 100 heifers to pay off some of the money they owe Whitfield — and that it's up to Spencer to rebuild everything they've lost.

Jacob and Jack leave the ranch for a hearing — and come face-to-face with a mountain lion on the porch. However, the lion races off before Jacob can kill it, and after Cara jokes it's comforting Jacob now has something to worry about, Jacob tells her he's "always worried, honey" and gives her a kiss. I am simply obsessed with them!! (I also need them both to make it to the end of the series, I'm so serious).

The mountain lion doesn't last for long, however, after it returns, almost attacks Elizabeth, and gets shot by Cara.

In town, Jacob (and us) learn Zane and Alice's marriage has been rendered void after they were attacked & arrested for miscegenation last season — and that Whitfield is behind everything...to literally no one's surprise.

Whitfield's still thinking about the Duttons himself, talking about how Jacob might be strong and mighty like a bear, but enough bee stings can lead to the bear's death ("Death by a Thousand Cuts" anyone?). He finds reassurance in the knowledge the trial is another metaphorical bee sting for Jacob Dutton to, well, bear.

Banner Creighton's also preparing for the trial, and tells his wife that after a lifetime of struggle, Whitfield's new provision means their son has a future. "I'll lay with the devil to give him that," he says. Chills me to my very core.

Teonna Rainwater is still on the run.

Father Renaud and his men are still on the hunt for Teonna. Unfortunately I do mean that very literally because they attack a Comanche village in their pursuit, but Teonna, thank goodness, is safe with her father and Pete, the latter of whom she finally starts a romantic relationship with.

But right when they're starting to get ~cozy~ (if you catch my drift), they notice a horseback rider — and learn from him that they're in Texas (don't worry, the horseback rider isn't Father Renaud).

And Spencer & Alex are fighting to get back to each other.

Spencer's latest sea voyage is a lot less relaxing than we saw at the end of season 1; he's working in the bottom of a ship, where he becomes friends with Luca after defending the younger man from a rapist and saving him from jumping into the ocean. And, okay, we're only one episode in and they've already formed a really sweet bond that I hope continues through the whole season — maybe Luca can come back to the ranch!

Our favorite Dutton hero now has two missions: get back to his family and find Alex. So, to get some money and get it quick, Spencer starts a couple of one-on-one fights while Luca collects bets. Of course, Spencer wins. (Duh).

Meanwhile, back in England, Alex is still mourning her separation from Spencer. And when Jennifer visits her, Alex reveals she's desperate to get to Montana is because she's actually pregnant with Spencer's child. WHAT! I need 5-7 business days to process this information! Who knows, maybe Alex and Spencer are ancestors of John Dutton? (Beth definitely shares Alex and Spencer's grit and spunk, hello). Alex ropes Jennifer into selling her jewelry to book passage to America...even if that passage ends up being in the thieves and beggars class.

Whew! I can't wait to tune in next week to see what the future has in store for the Duttons.

What time does 1923 air?

New episodes of 1923 season 2 airs on Paramount+ at 12 AM EST/9PM EST.

See our interview with Julia Schlaepfer for more — and read up on The 1923 Season 1 Ending, Deaths, & Betrayals, Explained for a refresher.

This post has been updated.