It has been a miserable year for gold bulls and the gold miners themselves, with the yellow metal suffering its worst decline in a decade. Since the year began, gold prices have dropped close to 28% and are now off 36% since hitting a high of $1,888 an ounce in August 2011.

The impetus for the recent drop in the price of gold is the imminent paring back of the Federal Reserve's monetary easing policy known as QE3. This policy allowed the Fed to purchase $85 billion each month in a combination of long-term Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities, and it also gave gold optimists comfort that their money-printing hedge would maintain its value or even head higher. With QE3 set to end sooner rather than later, and margin requirements on owning gold spiking because of volatility, bulls haven't been able to head to the exits fast enough.

In spite of these concerns, I still feel very confident about the future of gold prices. Previously, I listed five reasons I thought gold was a screaming buy, and I still consider each and every one of these reasons valid today. I also have absolutely no intention of selling any of my commodity-based holdings in my personal portfolio.

Source: Robin van Mourik, Flickr.

While gold at $1,200 an ounce will certainly make it difficult for some gold miners to operate profitably -- such as in Africa, where labor costs and political unrest made it challenging even when gold was north of $1,700 an ounce -- four miners stand out as being ahead of their peers in their ability to survive and even thrive in this depressed gold environment.

Yamana Gold
This isn't to say that Yamana hasn't felt the pain of gold's descent, because shareholders are definitely feeling the pain with the share price off 57% from its November intraday high. However, Yamana Gold is the best gold miner among its peers from a statistical standpoint.

Yamana's byproducts, consisting primarily of copper and molybdenum, helped offset the costs of its gold mining, dropping its cash operating costs to just $383 per gold-equivalent-ounce, a fraction of its peers, in the first quarter. Further, Yamana's all-in sustaining cost -- a measure of its operating costs as well as its sustainable costs to keep up production -- was only $856/GEO. Despite few miners expanding production in lieu of weak gold prices, Yamana also increased production its Mercedes and Minera Florida mines by 53% and 38%, respectively. Spot gold prices would have to fall considerably before Yamana's profitability is to be compromised.

Goldcorp
Goldcorp may no longer be the historical low-cost leader when it comes to mining, ceding that title to Yamana, but it still has the tools to outperform its peers with gold at $1,200/oz.

In Goldcorp's most recent quarter it delivered cash operating costs of $565 per gold equivalent ounce, with all-in sustaining costs of $1,135 an ounce. Even with gold prices depressed, Goldcorp delivered $400 million in operating cash flow. Like Yamana, Goldcorp's grandiose secret is that its mines are flush with byproduct metals, like silver, copper, lead, and zinc, which it can sell to offset the costs of mining gold. The company's most lucrative mine, Penasquito, still has approximately 15 million ounces of proven and probable reserves yet to be unearthed and is based in Mexico, a country known for reasonably cheap labor costs in the mining industry. Even though I consider Yamana to be more attractive than Goldcorp, there's little reason Goldcorp can't thrive, even now.

Royal Gold
One of the smartest, yet also riskiest, ways to play a drop in gold is to invest in royalty interest companies. With their margins tied directly to the rising and falling price of gold, royalty interest companies such as Royal Gold are certainly not for the faint of heart -- but they also come with certain advantages that traditional miners can't offer investors.

For one, Royal Gold's obligation ends with its cash investment into a mine. In return for its royalty interest in a mine's production, Royal Gold has no other prevailing costs. That means mine upkeep and expansion beyond its initial investment isn't its concern. Royal Gold has a well-diversified portfolio of royalty interests, consisting of 36 developed, and 22 in-development, mines. With low-cost purchase deals in place and essentially few corporate expenses, it'd take a huge drop in gold prices to affect Royal Gold's profitability.

Silver Wheaton
It's an often forgotten about name, when it comes to gold mining since most investors will focus on its multiple silver contracts, but mining royalty interest company Silver Wheaton is another attractive investment.

Like Royal Gold, Silver Wheaton supplies cash upfront to silver and gold miners that don't have the appropriate capital needed to build out their mines. In return, Silver Wheaton locks in long-term contracts that allow them to purchase some, or all, of the produced silver and gold at a rate that's extremely attractive relative to current prices. Last year, Silver Wheaton pulled the trigger on a deal with HudBay Minerals for $750 million, which will allow it to purchase 100% of the gold production of HudBay's flagship 777 mine through at least 2016, and then 50% of the remaining gold throughout the life of the mine thereafter, at an averaged fixed cost of just $400 an ounce (which is subject to an inflationary adjustment).

A bump in the road
Gold has clearly hit a bump in the road, but reasons to expect a rebound are still readily visible. Whether it takes weeks, months, or perhaps even years, for gold to find its footing, these four miners are unlikely to face any profitability pressures or much more downside in my opinion.

In June 2011 I invested my money equally in a selection of 10 high-yield dividend stocks. With a year of success behind me, in July 2012, I added even more money to the portfolio. Those names offer triple the yield of the average S&P 500 stock. You can read all the details here. Now let's check out the results so far.

Source: Capital IQ, a division of Standard & Poor's.

There has been quite the switch in portfolio performance in the past couple weeks, and it appears that investors were switching out of dividend stocks. The total portfolio is now up 15.9%. That's down from recent weeks for a couple reasons -- first, just because of adding new money to the portfolio that hasn't had time to work. Second and the bigger reason, investors really have shifted out of dividend stocks for the moment, but we've found some great deals in Ryman Hospitality and Gramercy.

So that all leads us to underperformance on the S&P of 5.8 percentage points. Someday, investors will get over their short-term dislike for dividend stocks, and we'll narrow the gap. The blended yield is 4.8%.

The news that the Federal Reserve might slow quantitative easing seems to have spooked the market, especially for dividend stocks. The reasoning is that as interest rates rise, investors will switch out of dividend stocks and into bonds. Am I worried? Not at all. The historical evidence on dividend stocks suggests that they outperform over time. So why worry about some short-termers who trade out of them as interest rates might rise? Let's remember all the fear that attended the tax-rate increase on dividends at the end of last year. That led to some decent buying opportunities for people who were thinking longer-term. So now is not the time to panic.

As I mentioned before, I've added $1,000 in shares of Gramercy to the portfolio. While it doesn't pay a dividend now, I expect one in the near future and for shares to appreciate meaningfully.

I haven't yet added $1,000 in new money to Sprott Resource, but I'll look to do that in the next week. Sprott has really been hit hard as gold prices have plummeted, though less than 25% of its assets are actually gold. In fact, more than 50% are in energy, which I expect to do well as the economy improves.

With more than $500 in cash in the account now, I'm tempted to buy more Ryman, which is quite cheap for a quality franchise. On the last conference call, management was talking about taking on some debt to buy back shares -- a very shareholder-focused move. I hope they pursue this avenue further.

We finally got word on dividends from our two U.K. companies. National Grid will pay out about $2.09 per share on Aug. 21, while Vodafone distributes about $1.05 per share on Aug. 7. Those dividends contribute meaningfully to the nearly $160 in payouts that are owed to the portfolio.

Shares of Annaly common stock continue to get hammered. With the declining interest-rate spread, I thought it was a good time to sell the stock in March. I sold at $15.32 per share, but I also added the preferred stock around the same time. While the preferred has gotten hit in recent weeks because of the sell-off in all things REIT, it's down nowhere close to what the common stock has seen. The Series D now has an attractive 7.6% yield and trades below par, and it doesn't have nearly the downside that the common still has.

Philip Morris is having a tough time in Europe, as the euro malaise continues. But tobacco is a resilient business, and the company has other fast-growing areas to cultivate. And trading at less than 16 times this year's earnings and 14 times next year's, the stock should be a good long-term investment regardless of what happens this year in euro-land. While Philip Morris is facing more regulatory threats across the globe, take a look at what fellow Fool Austin Smith thinks about the company in this video.

Dividends and earnings announcements
Here is the recent news on earnings and dividends:

Dividend news:

• Annaly Series D went ex-dividend on May 30 and pays out almost $0.48 per share on June 30.
• Brookfield went ex-dividend on May 29 and pays outs $0.43 per share on June 28.
• Ryman went ex-dividend on June 26 and pays outs $0.50 per share on July 14.

All that, of course, means more money coming into our pockets.

It's fun to sit back and get paid, and with the market volatility, we might have a good chance to reinvest those dividends at good prices. Europe continues to be an absolute mess, and continued bad news will probably have stocks plunging again. If they do, I'll be inclined to pick more shares up.

Foolish bottom line
I've been a fan of big dividends for a while, and I think this portfolio will outperform the market over time through the power of dividends. As I promised in the original article, I'll continue to track and report on the portfolio's progress, including news on these companies.

If you like dividends, consider these 12 tickers along with the nine names from a brand-new, free report from The Motley Fool's expert analysts called "Secure Your Future With 9 Rock-Solid Dividend Stocks." Today I invite you to download it at no cost to you. To get instant access to the names of these 9 high yielders, simply click here -- it's free.

The Walking Dead may be chomping on The Vampire Diaries when it comes to TV ratings, but, at the movies, rotting corpses are usually no match for the bloodsuckers, or even werewolves. Can Brad Pitt's surprise hit World War Z, based on the popular book by Max Brooks, change all that? So far, the dead are putting up some pretty live numbers.

The zombie thriller raced to a $66.4 million opening weekend in the U.S. and has since added $22 million in domestic receipt,s and $45.8 million in international ticket sales heading into this weekend's showings, according to data supplied by Box Office Mojo.

Zombies on a plane! Sources: Paramount Pictures, YouTube.

No doubt the film's producers are relieved. World War Z's $190 million budget and well-known production snafus had some worrying that the film would be a John Carter-sized disaster for Viacom's Paramount Pictures. Instead, the studio is apparently already in talks about a sequel.

Did I mention the rotting part?
But again, The Walking Dead is an exception. The breakout zombie hit for AMC Networks enters its fourth season in October as the top-rated scripted show of the 2012-2013 fall season, and that's in spite of an uncommonly tight budget for a drama dependent on brilliant makeup and visual effects artists.

SOURCE: Frank Ockenfels/AMC.

World War Z isn't exactly in Walking Dead territory. But, as you can see from the data compiled by Box Office Mojo, it's rare for a zombie flick to attract any kind of a wide audience. So rare, in fact, that World War Z is already tops in the genre -- presuming you discount Sony's animated monster mashup, Hotel Transylvania:

Source: Box Office Mojo.
** Where the monster in question is somehow attached to the lead character.

Remember: go for the head
Each big box office makes it more likely we'll see more monsters at the theater. In the meantime, Walt Disney's Marvel Studios has taken pains to reclaim the film rights to darker characters such as the vampire-hunting Blade, and the demon-possessed Ghost Rider. Netflix, for its part, has ordered a second season of its original horror hit, Hemlock Grove.

And why not? Judging by the numbers, the dead are alive and well. Invest accordingly.

Airline miles or cash back? Annual fee or no annual fee?

Deciding which credit card is the best for you can be a tough decision.

In this segment of The Motley Fool's everything-financials show, Where the Money Is, banking analysts Matt Koppenheffer and David Hanson tell viewers which credit cards they prefer and what those cards mean to the companies issuing them.

To view Wednesday's version of Where the Money Is in its entirety, click here!

You can follow David and Matt on Twitter. 

As a young person, you exhibit the single most desirable component of the investing universe: time.

Time is the magic ingredient when it comes to making your money grow. If you haven't yet hit the big 3-0, the financial world is your oyster. A little sacrifice now can reap you big rewards down the road.

Make the most of your time and money during this phase of your life with these three strategies. Your future self will be happy you did.

1. Live within your means
Young people face a lot of competing demands for their dollars. Buying a car, getting married, and securing a house are just a few. But don't let the keeping-up-with-the-Joneses mentality tempt you. Sure, the Audi coupe, $30,000 wedding, and 4-bed/3-bath townhouse look amazing, but they're the biggest obstacles on the road from here to destination financial-peace-of-mind. Getting your spending under control now will let you be in control of your financial future.

2. Pay down debt
Every dollar that's tied up in paying down debt is one less that you can use to save for retirement. By devising a plan for reducing your debts, you can pay them off faster, allowing you to allocate more money toward retirement savings. Simply put, by paying down loans earlier you maximize future savings.

This could not be truer than for credit card liabilities. As soon as humanly possible, transfer balances from high-interest cards to those with lower rates. Ideally, find a card with a 0% introductory APR, and pay the balance off in full before the zero-percent interest clock stops.

3. Fund retirement accounts
Laying down a solid foundation for retirement right now is critically important. With compound interest accumulating over many decades until you retire, you don't have to save nearly as much money by starting now versus if you don't start saving for another five, 10, or 15 years. Not only do you have time on your side, but also the advantage of tax-deferred (heck, even tax-free) growth that comes with retirement accounts.

Sock away as much as you can into your retirement plan at work and at least enough to get the maximum match your employer offers. If you can squeeze out even more money from your budget, contribute to a Roth IRA as long as you qualify for doing so.

Make sure the money you're saving for retirement won't be touched until then. Yes, you can get money out of a 401(k) or IRA before you retire if you absolutely must, but there's generally a penalty -- and taxes, too -- for doing so.

To the victor go the spoils
Retirement might seem very far down the road. And, lucky for you, it is. By adopting sensible money habits, conquering your debts, and saving for retirement early in life, you'll reap the reward of a secure retirement later.

Homeowners have enjoyed rock-bottom mortgage rates for years now. But with the recent spike up in bond yields, mortgage rates have followed suit, climbing a full percentage point to about 4.5% for 30-year mortgages in just the past two months. Given the speed of the rate increase, concerned would-be homebuyers are wondering just how far mortgage rates could climb.

A recent column from financial analyst Richard Barrington asked how quickly rising mortgage rates could come, and he argues that 6% rates could be just a year away without anything more extraordinary than a return to more normal conditions in the credit markets. Let's take a closer look at the arguments for and against continued rises in mortgage rates and the impact they could have on your finances.

Focusing on margins
One way to look at mortgage rates is from the perspective of the lenders that make mortgage loans. As Barrington notes, lenders have to pay special attention to the potential for future inflation because the long-term nature of mortgage loans can potentially leave them exposed to interest-rate risk for decades. Historically, when you look at the spreads that lenders have demanded over expected inflation rates over the past 40 years, you find mortgage rates that were typically almost 4.5 percentage points above the rate of inflation. Therefore, when you look at past inflation since 2008 that has averaged about 1.5%, you get a "standard" mortgage rate of 6% once those spreads get back to normal.

Interestingly, though, this analysis doesn't mention an important factor: Increasingly over the past decade, major mortgage lenders haven't held onto their loans but rather have sold them on to government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac . During the housing boom, mortgage lenders Bank of America and Citigroup didn't perform as well as they did because they were securing particularly high margins on their mortgage loans. Rather, they collected transaction-based income by immediately reselling conforming loans to Fannie and Freddie, often retaining streams of income from risk-free mortgage-servicing rights without keeping any liability for potential loan default. Even now, Wells Fargo relies on strength in mortgage-related income, and decreases in refinancing activity pose a threat to income growth in future quarters -- although unlike many of its peers, Wells has actually retained a good portion of its loans on its own books.

Fannie Mae headquarters in Washington, D.C. Image source Wikimedia Commons, by Nick Anfinsen.

Will the government allow mortgage rates to rise further?
The recent hit to the bond market has led many to question just how much influence the Fed can exercise over long-term rates in the long run. Even the possibility of cutbacks on its bond-buying program was enough to send rates soaring, prompting several Fed officials to take issue publicly with what they saw as an overreaction in the bond market to the message that policymakers were trying to send. With the Fed continuing to buy bonds with particular attention to the mortgage-backed bonds that help keep mortgage rates low, it would take a complete loss of control from the Fed to allow mortgage rates to hit 6% in anything approaching the 2014 timeframe that a reversion to normal interest spreads would imply.

Still, given the government's interest in keeping the economy growing, allowing a quick rise in mortgage rates to 6% would probably cause substantial collateral damage. Home prices that have risen by double-digit percentages over the past year would suddenly be in jeopardy of dropping, as monthly payments on a $250,000 mortgage would rose from around $1,125 at 3.5% to almost $1,500 at 6%, making homes much less affordable for many prospective borrowers. Homebuilders that have seen big recoveries in buying demand would suddenly see buying interest dry up, and the employment prospects for workers in the industry as well as those helping to provide related services would decline as well. That's a downward spiral that the Fed can't afford to allow to happen.

Be ready, but be patient
Eventually, a return of mortgage rates to more normal levels in the 6% range seems likely. But it will only happen once the economy shows signs of being able to withstand the pressures on economic growth that would come with such an increase. That doesn't seem likely by next year, but it could come sooner than you think -- and so being prepared and taking advantage of still-low rates while they last makes long-term financial sense.

South Korean electronics giant Samsung just formed a joint venture with a German firm. The venture with carbon and graphite manufacturing expert SGL Group will provide Samsung with a steady supply of carbon fiber materials in return for marketing assistance to SGL across Asia, at first.

Sammy's smartphones are often knocked for their cheap look and feel, being made mainly out of standard plastics. On the other hand, Apple iPhones are impeccable masterpieces of industrial design -- but being covered in glass on two sides, they're prone to cracked and shattered glass panels.

Will carbon fiber shells give Samsung a solution to the trade-off between tangible quality and ruggedness? The material is light but sturdy and looks like a million bucks if you treat it right. A perfect fit for high-end smartphones, right?

All of that is true, but Fool contributor Anders Bylund would still advise you not to hold your breath waiting for a carbon fiber Galaxy S5 from Samsung. This partnership is aimed at other markets, both in terms of geography and business applications. If this is the silver bullet for Samsung's low-end design values, Sammy isn't likely to fire it anytime soon.

On one level, it's a silly question: Of course Ford is an American company. With headquarters in Michigan and over a century of building and selling cars here, the Ford brand and Ford's vehicles are an everyday part of American life.

But at the same time, Ford is making its most ambitious overseas expansion effort ever - and soon, non-American markets will be more important to Ford than ever before. In this video, Fool.com contributor John Rosevear looks at Ford's ambitious global plans - and at why anyone investing in Ford needs to be looking far beyond America's shores.

Exchange-traded funds have taken the investing world by storm, having made it easy for millions of investors to get exposure to the overall stock market as well as niche investment areas. But lately, we've seen one big flaw emerge with ETFs that investors need to be aware of.

In the following video, Fool contributor Dan Caplinger notes that recently, several ETFs have shown big disparities between their share prices and the underlying value of the assets. Dan points out that while this is fairly common among international ETFs, where foreign markets aren't always open when U.S. exchanges are trading, the phenomenon has spread to U.S. bond market ETFs. Dan concludes that a lack of liquidity is always a concern with ETFs, and so you really need to look at the underlying assets before you buy ETF shares.

In case you haven't heard, the United States has the potential to pump out a lot of oil in the near term. But what about the long term? Well, the country's production grew faster in 2012 than in any previous year in the history of American oil. That's a good sign. And for the last week of May, production actually topped imports -- the first time that has happened since January 1997. That's another good sign.

The best sign came from the Energy Information Administration earlier this month, which projects that Uncle Sam could crank out up to 10.2 billion barrels of oil per day (mbopd) and 18 mbopd of combined petroleum liquids in a best-case, high-resource scenario. That's quite a remarkable turnaround from the turn of the century, although it's important to remember that it's a long-term projection -- meaning it has the highest likelihood of being wrong. Nonetheless, Fool contributor Maxx Chatsko breaks it all down for investors in the following video.

Slower growth expectations in China aren't a good sign for gaming companies, and that's why stocks were jolted in trading early this week. The big challenge is that more capacity is hitting Macau for the next few years, and the area needs growth to justify the massive investment companies are making. China's growth has fueled a growing middle class and the ability for more gamblers to take their bets to Macau. It's inevitable that China's overall growth and Macau's growth are linked, and that's worth watching if you're invested in gaming stocks.

For more on this topic, check out the following video.

At the Consumer Electronics Show back in January, graphics-chip specialist NVIDIA showed off a new portable gaming device that it called Project Shield. As my colleagues Eric Bleeker and Austin Smith discussed at the time, creating Shield was an odd move for NVIDIA.

After all, NVIDIA's core competency is building graphics chips: particularly for hardcore gamers. More recently, it has moved to become a major player in the mobile processor market. While it's understandable that NVIDIA wants to encourage a "marriage" of gaming and mobile computing, building its own portable gaming system could make investors wonder whether the company is losing focus.

On Wednesday afternoon, investors got another reason to worry. With Shield scheduled to go on sale the following day, NVIDIA announced that shipments will be delayed until July because of a third-party mechanical component that did not meet NVIDIA's standards. Is NVIDIA in trouble, or is this a minor incident that will have no lasting impact on the company?

Safeguarding the brand
As Patrick Moorhead of Forbes recently wrote, NVIDIA's decision to delay Shield was wise if there really was a quality control problem. Had the company released a faulty product in its first foray into the device market, it could have doomed the entire project.

That said, it's disturbing that NVIDIA got so close to the launch date before deciding to postpone it. Since Shield was supposed to go on sale on Thursday, retailers who are carrying the device probably have faulty units already in stock, which now need to get shipped back to NVIDIA and fixed or written off. Furthermore, if it took until the last day to recognize and react to this quality control issue, it's possible that other issues were also missed earlier in the testing process.

Looking forward
Now the company needs to scramble to fix the problem, which could distract management from the core chipmaking business. There have already been some hiccups there recently; the company's Tegra 4 mobile processor was delayed, possibly costing NVIDIA some design wins. Whereas Tegra 3 hit the market (in limited quantities) in December 2011, Tegra 4 is just starting to show up in devices now. That lag in product introductions is much greater than the one-year industry standard.

Another concern is inventory risk. While initial shipments of Shield were probably fairly modest, it could still be expensive to fix or replace all of those units. That's especially troubling when the device isn't expected to earn very high profits; NVIDIA recently dropped the price from $349 to $299 to stimulate consumer demand.

Foolish bottom line
It's possible that this incident will just be a slight bump in the road for NVIDIA. After all, gaming devices aren't NVIDIA's bread and butter -- the company is really relying on its Tegra and Icera mobile chips and its GRID cloud-based graphics cards for future growth. Shield is just a sideshow, at least for now.

The danger for NVIDIA investors is if Shield becomes a costly sideshow. Investors should definitely keep an eye on the company's margins in its next quarterly report, and look out for any disclosures about losses related to this quality issue.

That said, in light of the company's fairly low valuation, good prospects in its core areas of focus, and its significant program to return cash to shareholders, the stock still looks attractive at current levels. If NVIDIA's management can maintain its focus on the company's main growth drivers -- the upcoming Tegra 4i chip and the rollout of GRID servers -- the benefits should overshadow any headwinds from Shield.

Six months into the year, the Dow Jones Industrials have delivered their best performance since the roaring bull market of the 1990s, with gains of almost 14% having sent the average up by more than 1,800 points. Even though the Dow lost ground in June -- the first down month all year -- it still posted a respectable 2% gain for the second quarter.

But some of the Dow's stocks have done even better than the overall average. Let's look at the four stocks that have more than doubled the return of the Dow so far in 2013, with an eye toward what could be coming next for these companies in the second half of the year and beyond.

Hewlett-Packard , up 76.2%
Many investors don't understand how HP has managed to recover so strongly this year. After all, CEO Meg Whitman's turnaround strategy still has a long way to go before it completely plays out, and it's far from certain that HP will succeed in putting its PC legacy behind it and finding new avenues for strong growth. If you only look at 2013's stock performance in isolation, you might come to the conclusion that investors are betting everything on a home run from Whitman and her team.

The key to HP's gains, though, is the fact that the stock got beaten down so badly last year. As a result, even with the stock's gains, HP still carries a price that offers some margin of safety even if things don't go as well as its executive team hopes. Moreover, if things go well, there's still some upside left for new investors in HP.

Boeing , up 37.5%
Ordinarily, when a company has a major product recall, it's bad news for the stock. Yet even though Boeing had to ground its brand-new 787 Dreamliner aircraft early this year, the company managed not only to fix the plane's battery problem and get the Dreamliner up and flying again but also to make its official launch of its stretched Dreamliner 787-10 at the Paris Air Show.

None of Boeing's problems kept airlines and aircraft leasing companies from making initial orders of the Dreamliner, and the company sees a multi-trillion-dollar opportunity for aircraft sales in a number of different areas, ranging from the fuel efficient 737 MAX line of single-aisle planes to an eventual potential updated 777X that could improve on the large airliner's fuel efficiency. All these opportunities give Boeing plenty of room to fly higher.

Microsoft , up 31.3%
Almost all of Microsoft's gains have come in the past few months, as investors have finally gotten comfortable with the value proposition behind the stock. Despite persistent concerns about Windows 8, Microsoft recently announced plans to provide its Windows 8.1 update to address concerns raised by early adopters of the operating system. In addition, the company has made some progress in the mobile space, assuming the No. 3 spot convincingly.

Microsoft has plenty of work left to do, but even after the recent run-up, shares still fetch just 11 times forward earnings estimates. Growth potential from moving Office software to a subscription-based model as well as its Xbox One next-generation gaming console could provide the drivers necessary to push Microsoft to even new heights.

American Express , up 30.9%
Payment processors thrive on improving economic prospects, and American Express owes its rise to all-time highs to the health of consumer spending. Even though its rivals in the card-network business have far greater transaction volume and cards issued, AmEx nevertheless has the edge in income, because it's willing to take on the credit risk of its cardholders.

AmEx has traditionally targeted upper-income customers, but expanding into the prepaid-card business should provide even more growth and expose the company's brand to a new demographic group. That could spell even greater profits down the road.

Where will the Dow go?
Recent turbulence in the broader market suggests that the Dow's second half might not be as lucrative as the first. Picking the right stocks, though, can get you better returns than the overall average, so be sure to look not just at how stocks have done so far in 2013 but whether they still have further reasons to move even higher.

Recently, I wrote an article about the advances in battery and other green technology that could be a risk factor for Tesla Motors . A question that was raised was why Tesla couldn't just switch to another battery technology. That's a very good question. Here's why it's not as easy as it sounds, and how it could affect Tesla's stock.

Photo: Oleg Alexandrov, via Wikimedia Commons. 

Is it easy to switch between batteries?
In a Congressional Research Service for Congress, Bill Canis wrote regarding the development of lithium-ion batteries, "the automaker's decision as to which battery to procure will be in effect for a prolonged period, perhaps the life of the vehicle model, as a battery designed for one vehicle may not function optimally in another."

He also points out that even when an automaker enters into an agreement with a battery manufacturer -- as Tesla, Nissan and Toyota have done with Panasonic  -- the automaker is "integrally involved" in the design and production of the battery.

The reason is straightforward: Each automaker has proprietary technology that reacts in a specific way with the battery's output and overall vehicle operations. As General Motors put it, "The Volt's battery pack design is directly coupled with the vehicle design to assure complete integration between the battery pack and the vehicle." 

In other words, each battery is designed specifically for the car it's going to be used in -- a battery made for a Tesla Model S is optimally designed for that car; a battery made for a Nissan Leaf is optimally designed for i car. More pointedly, the battery itself influences the car's design.

Swap shop
So is Tesla tied to its current battery? Absolutely not. Tesla uses a modular battery design, and as technology advances in li-ion batteries, it can swap out the cells. But that's swapping li-ion for li-ion. As technology changes, Tesla could switch to a different battery type, but it's not as simple as swapping one battery for another; the battery itself has to be specifically designed to integrate with Tesla's vehicles.

Consider: When Tesla designed its battery pack and electric powertrain system, it did so to meet the requirements of a li-ion battery. Tesla states: "Designing an electric powertrain and a vehicle to exploit [li-ion battery] energy efficiency has required extensive safety testing and innovation in battery packs, motors, powertrain systems and vehicle engineering. Our proprietary technology includes cooling systems, safety systems, charge balancing systems, battery engineering for vibration and environmental durability, customized motor design, and the software and electronics management systems necessary to manage battery and vehicle performance under demanding real-life driving conditions."  

Different types of batteries behave differently. More importantly, li-air batteries are still being developed, so things like specific energy, energy density, specific power, charge/discharge efficiency, self-discharge rate, and cycle durability are all theoretical. However, two known differences are size and weight -- li-air batteries are smaller and lighter. Consequently, you can't simply exchange a li-ion battery for a li-air battery.

So what does this mean for Tesla?
There are a number of ways Tesla could incorporate new technology:

1. It could completely redesign its vehicles around the specifications of new battery technology -- the most expensive option, and unlikely.

2. It could combine its li-ion battery with a new type of battery, as is believed to be the case with its patent for metal-air batteries -- unfortunately, this still uses expensive li-ion technology. 

3. It could leave the car design unchanged and retrofit a completely new battery with the same form, fit, and function of li-ion-- however, depending on the makeup of the battery, that could negatively affect optimum performance.

But no matter how you break it down, there has to be a redesign somewhere, and that spells cost.

For a large company like Toyota or GM, that cost is something they can afford. However, Tesla is not on the scale of Toyota or GM. In fact, until recently, Tesla had a net loss every quarter since the company's inception, which through last Dec. 31 accumulated to a total net loss of $1,065.6 million. Furthermore, Tesla's recent profits are largely due to the Model S. That's one car. Yes, it's an absolutely beautiful car, and a technological masterpiece, but Tesla's business model is dependent on widespread acceptance of the Model S, as it intends to use those profits to develop the Model X. What this basically boils down to is that Tesla may not have the necessary resources for a new battery. 

Can't Tesla get new battery cells from Panasonic? The short answer is yes. But that doesn't negate the need for research and development. Panasonic and Tesla have a history of partnering in battery design, But that's exactly what it is -- a partnership. It's not all Panasonic footing the bill. Further, a partnership would rely on Panasonic's desire to make a li-air battery for Tesla. Although I think it's highly likely it would, how much that'd cost Tesla is uncertain. 

A look into the future
Future technological advances in batteries is a risk to Tesla because of the cost involved. Could Tesla switch to a new battery? Of course. Did I say it couldn't? No. But given Tesla's recent profitability after 10 years of net losses, the cost that battery could require would probably hurt Tesla's bottom line -- whether it's a little or a lot. Therefore, it could also hurt Tesla's stock price. Finally, batteries themselves may not be the future for green cars. As I've written before, cryogen (liquid) air powered engines are re-emerging as a possible alternative energy. They use existing infrastructures, and the technology is such that energy stored as liquid air would allow "wrong time" energy produced by wind farms, and other sources, to be stored for later use.

This is a big deal. Consequently, this is something investors would do well to monitor.

Toyota's 2014 Corolla. Photo: Toyota.

It's no secret that Detroit's Big Three automakers have been taking back market share in segments that have long been dominated by Toyota and Honda . Ford has especially gained much ground in fuel-efficient sedan segments with its popular Fusion and Focus models. This is great news for domestic auto investors like myself, but of course the No. 1 global sales leader isn't going to sit by idle. With the weakened yen, it gives Toyota and Honda an advantage that enables them to load up features without raising the price per vehicle, or simply take more of each revenue dollar to the bank.

It's unclear how the weak yen advantage will be used, but as Toyota's Corolla has felt pressure from the Ford Focus, its 2014 model looks to be much more aggressive to take back lost market share -- Corolla remains on top of the Focus, but the gap has narrowed quickly.

Information from Automotive News Data Center.

2014 Corolla
I'm an honest person, and I always call it as I see it. I'm a Ford guy and have been very pleased with how its new vehicles have grabbed market share aggressively in the U.S. as well as globally. But I also have to give Toyota credit for its Corolla, which has sold more than 40 million units in its 47-year life span and sells in 154 countries, making it a true global icon.

This 11th generation of the Corolla needed to be a little bit different, because its segments have been known for bland style and it has rarely seen creative designs. Ford brought a splash to the market with its recent designs that take style cues of the futuristic Evos concept vehicle -- which has been a hit with the market. Toyota's response is the more aggressive styling that goes beyond its typical comfort zone, and it will attempt to attract the same youthful consumers that Ford is striking it rich with.

Speaking of youthful consumers, one of the biggest factors to attract this consumer is a tech-savvy and stylish interior.

Interior of a 2014 Toyota Corolla. Photo Courtesy of Toyota.

The Corolla's interior steps up the game from its outgoing predecessor and creates a stylish and functional space with a more spacious interior to boot. Its use of interior color schemes and trims gives a premium feel and sporty look -- all useful elements when attracting a younger consumer. It also is said to have a very quiet cabin during drives, mitigating engine and environment noise through improved acoustic glass and insulation.

One drawback for the Corolla could be its engine, but it just depends on what you're looking for. The 2014 base model will come with an efficient 1.8-liter engine that's aimed at getting about 40 mpg -- though it hasn't been officially tested yet. It will fall short of horsepower output compared with the Ford Focus, which boasts a very popular turbocharged EcoBoost engine.

Investing takeaway
As a Ford investor, I know very well how much these fuel-efficient segments mean to automakers. The biggest growth trend has been called the "Super Segment" by Ford. Those four segments are represented by Ford's Focus, Fiesta, Fusion, and Escape -- no coincidence that those are four of Ford's most popular vehicles.

These high-volume sedans, the Corolla and Focus, represent a quick way to win market share and brand awareness in the U.S. and global markets. For the first time in more than two decades, all three Detroit automakers gained market share in the U.S. in the first quarter. Toyota is taking notice that Ford and GM are competing in segments where they had once been left for dead. It will take years to battle past stereotypes of poor-quality vehicles, but things are clearly changing, and that is confirmed by Toyota's radical image change with its 2014 Corolla -- it's feeling the pressure.

Toyota is still the No. 1 global automaker by sales, but Ford and General Motors seem very undervalued as they continue to impress consumers and critics in their rebound from the financial collapse and great recession. A savvy investor would be wise to forget the companies that they used to be, and acknowledge drastically improved companies before others do -- I believe great profits await early investors who recognize this.

As Detroit automakers continue to win back market share in the U.S. and produce popular models in growing segments, look for revenues, profits, and margins to all increase -- a big win for Ford and GM investors.

Investors may have noticed that Facebook has been in an imitative mood recently, replicating popular social-media features and launching rival offerings. Facebook's most direct rival is easily Twitter, and Facebook just adopted hashtags. Facebook's Poke app was a ripoff of Snapchat, and Instagram's new video service is a direct shot at Twitter's growing Vine service.

Well, copying a rival can sometimes pay off. Instagram video has only been out for about a week, and it's already taken a huge bite out of Vine. Social analytics researcher Topsy tracks shared links on Twitter, and the number of Vine links shared on Twitter has plunged since Facebook's entry.

Source: Topsy.

Instagram links shared on Twitter spiked briefly but tapered off and are about flat overall. Vine links peaked near 3 million shares earlier this month, but have since dropped to under 1 million.

Vine's value proposition of looping six-second videos is a little questionable. According to Topsy, the most popular video right now is a clip about using gummy worms as currency. That hasn't stopped Vine from garnering considerable attention as a possible video advertising platform.

Facebook's acquisition of Instagram has been controversial since the photo sharing service had exactly $0 revenue at the time the social network bought it. It was the user base that Facebook was interested in. Adding a video service won't immediately help the subsidiary generate revenue quite yet, although anything that hurts Twitter is certainly good for Facebook.

Facebook has been working on launching video ads, effectively bringing TV ads to user News Feeds. Video ads have been reportedly delayed until this fall because Facebook needs more time to work on complementary features that it wants to release concurrently.

The company knows that it needs to tread carefully with the user experience. The last thing people need is more ads that begin playing automatically in some background tab. Thankfully, Facebook will have them play silently when scrolled over.

Video ads are the next battleground in social media, and Instagram just posted a victory over Vine.

The following video is from Friday's installment of The Motley Fool's Weekly Tech Review, in which host Chris Hill and analysts Eric Bleeker and Jason Moser look at the biggest stories driving the tech sector this week.

While all the noise in the TV space continues to surround larger names such as an Xbox One or Apple's planned TV attempts. Intel  has been working in the background to create its own television offering: a set-top box that will deliver programming via broadband connections. 

In this segment, Jason and Eric look at the massive amount of difficulties involved in successfully breaking up content in the highly guarded cable-TV industry. While Intel has struck deals for some content from companies such as Viacom, News Corp., and CBS, larger agreements for their networks remains elusive. More so, these companies are reluctant to work with Intel in spite of Reuters reports that Intel is willing to pay subscriber fees that are 50% to 75% of what cable companies are currently paying them. 

The end result is that Intel's set-top box is aimed at a more "premium" end of the market, which would be an understandable disappointment for consumers hoping for cheaper "a la carte" offerings of different channels. Eric and Jason discuss the difficulties of trying out new business models in the media space, and how Intel's efforts highlight the difficulties securing content that have led to the continual delay of an Apple TV. 

The full video is available here.

The relevant video segment can be found between 0:00 and 6:18.

We're halfway through 2013, and it's time for some bold second-half predictions.

In this segment of The Motley Fool's everything-financials show Where the Money Is, banking analysts Matt Koppenheffer and David Hanson each make a bold prediction regarding how they see the rest of the year potentially playing out.

Help us improve and get a free gift! Take a short survey about the following show, and we'll give you access to our special free report "The One Remarkable Stock to Own Now." Just follow this link to take the survey and claim your copy of the report.

To view Where the Money Is in its entirety, click here!

You can follow David and Matt on Twitter. 

Netflix is on a roll. The streaming service just approved a new season of its original series Hemlock Grove. The show didn't grab the critical acclaim that House of Cards did, but it still attracted enough viewers to warrant signing up for another round.

In the following video, Fool contributor Demitrios Kalogeropoulos discusses how Netflix's analysis of viewer data has helped it make smart gambles like this on exclusive content. The biggest payoff for the company, he says, is that net subscriber additions should continue trending up as the service succeeds in differentiating itself from the competition.