The future of additive manufacturing has many naysayers and advocates. Many believe it will change the face of manufacturing in the near future, while others think the technology has a long way to go before it's capable of large-scale industrial applications. General Electric is in the former camp and has embarked on a mission to make history by using the technology for large-scale manufacturing of its fuel nozzles for the engines in Boeing's 737 MAX airplane. Investors in additive manufacturing should take note of these developments, as any moves that a company the size of GE makes will surely affect the entire industry.

Boeing 737-MAX. Photo: Boeing Media Images.

At this year's AUVSI Unmanned Conference in Washington, D.C., Motley Fool analysts Blake Bos and Rex Moore stopped by GE's Additive Development Center booth to see what the company had to say about the future of additive manufacturing. Watch the following video as Mike Cloran, marketing manager of GE's Additive Development Center, explains where he sees the technology heading over the next five to 10 years as the company tries to make history.

You probably don't often see Bank of America's name linked with the term "socially responsible," but the concept isn't as far out as you might think.

For the past few years, the bank has been involved in an initiative to make loans available to businesses that want to reduce their carbon footprint. The first multi-year program, to which B of A had committed $20 billion, completed its goal by the end of 2012. The current plan involves lending $50 billion over the next 10 years, and is also dedicating $100 million in grant money to further the green cause.

Investors want to invest more responsibly
Similarly, the trend toward socially responsible investing has not gone unnoticed at Bank of America. Between its Merrill Lynch Wealth Management and U.S. Trust units, B of A offers over 180 investment products with environmental, social, and governance themes. For some clients, Merrill Lynch Wealth Management also makes available, at no charge, a proxy voting service that assists shareholders in making their voices heard regarding socially responsible investing values.

Bank of America's Merrill Edge online brokerage now features these choices on a new Socially Responsible Investing page, allowing clients to filter and screen SRI funds according to their personal value system.

Not the first
Although Bank of America is now publicizing its SRI efforts, the concept is not new, and other banks have also been cultivating similar products. Wells Fargo , for instance, launched its Wells Fargo Advantage Social Sustainability Fund in 2008 and, in its Environmental Finance Report, published in May, stated its own involvement in a green lending program similar to B of A's. Wells also noted that it had invested over $500 million in wind and solar ventures, in addition to other projects, during 2012.

JPMorgan Chase beefed up its SRI services in 2008 by incorporating screening capabilities into their investment platform, allowing clients to sort companies by various filters, based upon their personal investing code. Also, First Republic Bank's Private Wealth Management unit provides SRI services for its clients, noting individual preferences during the advisement process. Interestingly, First Republic was a former unit of Merrill Lynch, but it was sold to a group of investors by Bank of America in 2009.

Good public relations
Giving the investor what he wants is always a smart move, and SRI is a trend that is gaining momentum. Merrill Lynch Wealth Management's CIO notes that investing with an eye toward social responsibility is making up a larger part of the managed investment picture these days -- and that the returns are competitive, too.

Announcements like this one can't hurt the bank's standing with the general public, either. With big banks -- particularly Bank of America -- still suffering from reputational damage from the financial crisis, publicizing investment products that place them in a positive light is savvy advertising, as well.

Shares of Hewlett-Packard plunged on Thursday following the company's somewhat disappointing Q3 earnings report and guidance. HP reported adjusted EPS of $0.86 on revenue of $27.2 billion, compared with EPS of $1.00 on revenue of $29.7 billion in the prior-year period. By the end of the day, HP shares were nearly 20% below the 52-week high set earlier this month.

Hewlett-Packard YTD Stock Performance, data by YCharts

HP appears to be perpetually undervalued, as many analysts are overly focused on revenue growth as opposed to earnings and free cash flow, which are the real drivers of value in a business. As of Thursday's close, HP's market cap has shrunk to $43 billion, even though the company has just $1.2 billion in net debt now and will produce free cash flow of roughly $8 billion this year.

As a value investor, this free cash flow yield over 18% is incredibly attractive. Moreover, with HP approaching its zero net debt target, much of this cash flow is likely to be returned to shareholders through higher dividends and share buybacks. As a result, HP looks like a solid contrarian value investment.

Strange fall
The odd thing about HP's big drop is that nothing really bad happened. Adjusted EPS of $0.86 came in right in the middle of the $0.84 to $0.87 outlook range that management provided in May. Revenue did come in slightly below the average analyst estimate, but the discrepancy was less than 1%.

There were no big surprises about HP's outlook, either. The company narrowed its FY13 EPS guidance range to $3.53-$3.57, compared with a prior outlook of $3.50-$3.60. That will put HP's earnings near the top of the original guidance provided last October for EPS of $3.40-$3.60.

The biggest "negative" was CEO Meg Whitman's admission that HP is unlikely to post revenue growth in FY14, whereas in May she had said that revenue growth was still possible for next year. However, this disclosure seems less dire if you consider that analysts already expected a 2% drop in revenue next year.

What's going on here?
It's impossible to reliably explain short-term stock price fluctuations. However, the most plausible explanation for the market's severe reaction to HP's earnings report is that many people expected another earnings beat this week, after the company came in ahead of expectations with its last two earnings reports. Indeed, I thought there was a good chance that the company would beat estimates and raise its FY13 guidance again.

HP's solid but uninspiring quarterly earnings clearly did not meet this standard. The fact that HP stock had more than doubled since late November also probably inspired investors with shorter time horizons to sell. With revenue growth now "postponed" until FY15 (or later), HP's rapid multiple expansion was destined to end.

Where will earnings go?
The biggest risk for long-term HP investors is that declining revenue will overshadow the company's cost cuts and lead to lower earnings. (For reference, FY13 will be the second year in a row that HP has experienced declining revenue and earnings.) On the other hand, if HP can grow earnings next year, it will dispel many of the bears' worst fears.

Fortunately, I expect HP to hold EPS flat or better in FY14. While HP has started to see significant benefits from its cost-cutting in the past quarter or two, this restructuring savings will probably accelerate next year. At the beginning of FY13, only 11,700 positions had been eliminated, whereas headcount reductions will reach 26,000 by the end of the fiscal year. Real estate and other non-payroll savings will also probably grow next year.

On the flip side, HP's revenue has slid by approximately by 8% this year but will probably decline by a smaller amount in FY14. The lower base revenue will create an easier comparison. In addition, the end of Windows XP support next April -- which will stimulate higher PC replacement demand -- and new products such as Moonshot low-power servers will provide counterweights to revenue pressure elsewhere in the business. The combination of lower revenue loss and more restructuring savings should allow HP to maintain or grow EPS next year.

Longer term, HP should be able to return to revenue growth after shifting more of its business to up-and-coming technologies. While many of HP's product lines are declining, the company does have newer products like its "converged storage" solutions that are growing rapidly. Over time, the growth in these newer businesses will be better able to offset declining revenue and earnings elsewhere in the company.

Waiting for a signal
At its current price, HP appears to be significantly undervalued despite the challenges it faces. With the company trading for just 5.5 times free cash flow, there is a good margin of safety for value investors willing to wait for earnings improvement a few years down the road. However, investors who are more risk averse may want to wait until after the company's annual analyst meeting in early October. At that time, we will get a better sense of the near-term outlook and the timeline for the rest of HP's turnaround process.

U.S. stock markets struggled along this week without much of a catalyst to get traders bidding shares higher or lower. Economic data showed more weakness in housing, new jobless claims remaining low, and a small rise in leading indicators -- a mixed bag for investors. By the end of the week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was trading 0.47% lower and the S&P 500 was up just 0.46%.

Microsoft was the clear winner this week, after a 7.3% pop yesterday. For the week, the stock was up a whopping 9.3%, driven by the announced retirement of CEO Steve Ballmer. His tenure will probably be remembered as unsuccessful because the stock price was down during the 13 years since he took over, but some perspective is needed when grading Ballmer as CEO. He took over at the peak of the Internet bubble, returned some $200 billion to shareholders, and tripled revenue during his tenure.

MSFT data by YCharts

Most CEOs would consider that a success, but living in the shadows of Steve Jobs, the Google guys, and others in tech has hindered investors' view of his success -- hence the pop when he said he was retiring.

Intel moved 2.4% higher this week, after Digitimes reported that new tablet and smartphone platforms will be launched later this year. The 14nm Cherry Trail will reportedly launch in the third quarter, with a 14nm Willow Trail chip in the fourth quarter. These product launches are key to Intel's mobile plans, which is needed for growth. If Intel gets this right, its 12 P/E ratio and 4.1% dividend yield will look like a great value for investors.  

Boeing rounds out the top three stocks on the Dow with a 1.9% gain this week. The company took a step toward winning a South Korean fighter contract by bidding $7.4 billion to build 60 aircraft for the country. It was the only bid under South Korea's price ceiling and appears to be the front-runner ahead of a final decision. Deutsche Lufthansa AG is also looking to buy 50 wide-body jets in an order that could bring in $10 billion to the winner. The 787 Dreamliner and 777X are reportedly being evaluated, and this could be another big win for the company.

Ford's strong new Fusion has been stealing sales from Toyota's Camry all year -- but now Toyota is in a prime position to push back, thanks to the Japanese government. Photo credit: Ford Motor.

Ford still isn't happy about the Japanese government's currency moves, which threaten to put a damper on its North American comeback. And once again, a Ford executive has stepped up to say so.

Building on concerns expressed by CEO Alan Mulally back in June, Ford's Americas chief, Joe Hinrichs, told Bloomberg this week that the weakened yen was allowing Ford's Japanese rivals to crank up imports -- just as Ford's own factories are straining to keep up with demand.

What's the deal? And is this really likely to hurt Ford?

How an exchange-rate shift can give Toyota a big advantage over Ford
Here's the background. Starting late last year, Japan's government made a series of moves to "devalue" the yen -- to make it worth less versus currencies like the U.S. dollar and the euro. The idea was to help boost Japan's economy, by making it easier for Japanese companies to compete in export markets.

How does that work? Well, when we say the yen has been devalued, what we mean is that the exchange rates have moved in such a way that companies such as Toyota can get more yen for the dollars they earn in places like the United States.

At the beginning of 2013, one dollar bought about 86 yen. Now, a dollar would buy almost 99 yen. That means that every dollar earned by a Japanese company in the U.S. is worth more money at home. And that means the Japanese companies can charge fewer dollars for their products and still have a nice profit when those dollars are converted to yen.

For a company such as Toyota or Honda that has the ability to produce cars in both the U.S. and Japan, it also means that it may be cheaper at the moment -- meaning more profitable -- to build cars in Japan and send them over here.

That doesn't mean Toyota or the other Japanese automakers will stop building cars in their U.S. factories. But it does mean that they can ship extra cars over here, giving their dealers more to sell -- at, possibly, lower prices.

Meanwhile, Ford -- and increasingly, General Motors as well -- is kind of in the opposite situation.

Ford's factories are close to maxed out
Ford's problem is that it is running into "capacity constraints" here in North America. Put another way, that means that Ford's factories are having trouble keeping up with demand for some of the company's hottest products, even though several of those factories are working around the clock.

With demand for new vehicles steadily rising in the U.S., Ford is concerned that the Japanese makers will be able to flood the market with cheaper cars just as the Blue Oval is struggling to keep up.

And it's on the verge of struggling to keep up: Ford has warned that supplies of its white-hot Fusion sedan, which has been stealing sales and market share from Toyota's Camry for much of the year, will be very tight until a second assembly line starts up in Michigan this fall. Ford has also added extra production of its F-Series pickups, which have been selling very briskly, and there are increasing signs of tight supplies of the Escape, the Explorer, and the Focus as well.

In time, Ford should be able to juggle its global production to keep up with demand here in the United States. But that will take time, and it could take a substantial amount of money if Ford has to add additional assembly lines, as it is doing with the Fusion.

Expect Toyota to be very aggressive here
Meanwhile, there are more and more signs that Toyota is getting aggressive about trying to take back market share in the United States. Toyota has lost ground here this year as more competitive models from Honda, Ford, and Nissan have cut into sales of its bread-and-butter vehicles such as the Camry and Corolla.

Nissan has already taken advantage of the exchange-rate swing. It cut prices on several models back in May and has seen a sizable increase in U.S. sales since. But Toyota is making it clear that it plans to defend the Camry's position as America's best-selling car, a position that is being threatened by Honda's strong new Accord.

Right now, Ford can't make enough Fusions to regain that title (which Ford's old Taurus held for years). That could change in a few months, once its new assembly line is up to speed. But with Toyota willing to be aggressive on pricing -- and with Toyota and the other Japanese automakers having plenty of excess manufacturing capacity back at home in Japan -- this battle could continue to be a tough one for the Blue Oval.

One of Apple's huge competitive advantages is its ecosystem. Thousands of independent software and hardware developers are working hard every day to make great products for iOS devices -- all of which make your phone and tablet (and Apple stock) ever more valuable to you.

Today, Motley Fool analyst Rex Moore reviews one of those products: The LensMag kit from Carson, which acts as a macro lens for your iPhone 5 camera.

The latest in drone and robotics technology was on display recently at the world's largest unmanned systems exhibition in Washington, D.C. California-based AeroVironment , which makes several unmanned aircraft systems, announced at the conference that a solar solution for its hand-launched Puma AE drone has extended its flight time from three to nine hours -- significantly longer than other small drones used in the field today.

Motley Fool analysts Rex Moore and Blake Bos were at the conference and chatted with AeroVironment's Dave Heidel. In the first of a multi-part series, Heidel shows off some of his company's aircraft.

Photo credit: Chevrolet,

General Motors is often blamed for killing the electric car in the early 1990s. However, it could now be said that GM is about to supercharge the electric-vehicle revolution, with the launch of its 2014 Chevy Spark EV. In fact, the company appears to have built an "electric" car in more ways than one.

First off, the 2014 Spark, which is a spin on the gasoline version of the Spark, packs quite a punch. The car generates 400 pound-feet of torque and 130 horsepower, which enables it to accelerate from 0 to 60 MPH in as little as 8.0 seconds. Let's just say that its power is generating a lot of buzz as it's turning the corner on the EV market.

The initial reviews are pretty glowing, as Consumer Reports has gone so far as to say that the Spark is shattering the reputation of electric cars as being anemic and inept. In fact, it said that the Spark was "one of the most enjoyable electric cars we've driven." Overall, reviews suggest that the Spark EV is far better than the gasoline version, which Consumer Reports had called "slow, noisy, and stiff."

Best of all for consumers, the Spark EV starts at just $27,495 before incentives, which is less than the comparable Nissan Leaf. Further, the Spark gets 119 MPG equivalent and costs consumers just $0.84 for the first 25 miles driven, which would rank it among the cheapest cars to drive. That could save consumers more than $9,000 over the course of five years based on the 2013 average of 23 MPG and at current gas prices. However, the drawback is that its range is just 82 miles, though it can be recharged in as little as 20 minutes using a special charging accessory.

While not as sleek and luxurious as a Tesla Model S, the more budget-friendly Spark EV does beat the Model S on fuel economy, as the 60 kW-hr battery pack version will cost upwards of $70,000 yet delivers only 95 MPGe, though its range is much better at 208 miles. Other than styling, the biggest difference between the two really is the battery.

The Spark EV packs a pretty hefty battery, which weighs in at 560 pounds. However, that's a lightweight compared with the Model S battery pack, which is estimated to be in excess of 1,000 pounds. That extra weight has improved the range of the Model S, though it does cause a weight problem, which is one reason Tesla chose to use liberal amounts of aluminum to offset the extra weight. As long as the commute is short, the Spark EV is the better option for consumers looking to save green while going green. 

Early indications are that Chevy has something special on its hands, which, when combined with the Volt, puts its offerings on par with its greener rivals Toyota and Ford . It's a good space to be in these days as Toyota, which makes the popular Prius, saw its July sales surge 40% over last year. However, it's a space that demands performance, which is something that Ford found out the hard way when its C-MAX was recently found not to deliver the estimated MPG that was the main draw for its customers. That being said, Ford's hybrid sales were still strong as its product lineup, which includes the C-MAX and Focus, drove a 32% sales jump this past July.

This is why GM it still has a lot of work to do, as its Volt has largely underwhelmed in the marketplace. This past July GM sold only 1,788 Volts, which is well short of its monthly goal of 2,000 to 3,000 Volts. The company needs a late surge just to stay flat with last year's sales. It's this uninspiring sales volume that's behind the company's recent decision to add a $5,000 incentive on top of the $7,500 government credit. Clearly, GM is hoping that the Spark can well, spark the sales of its greener cars. The early signs, at least from a performance perspective, is that the Spark has the potential to do just that.

America has a looming problem -- and Obamacare is going to make it worse. That's the conclusion from two former U.S. Senate majority leaders -- one a Democrat and the other a Republican.

It's rare that two influential members from both major U.S. political parties agree on anything related to the Affordable Care Act, commonly referred to as Obamacare. But former Democrat Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle from South Dakota and former Republican Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist from Tennessee recently co-wrote an article in Health Affairs that pointed out that the U.S. faces a doctor dilemma. And they say that Obamacare seems likely to make the problem even bigger.

What is this doctor dilemma? Daschle and Frist wrote that there are "alarming doctor shortages across the country." They're right.

The state of Hawaii reported 18% fewer doctors than needed in 2012. A recent study in the Greater Cincinnati area also found an 18% shortage of primary care physicians in that region. Actual and projected physician shortages have been identified in at least 33 states in the past few years. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says that around 30 million Americans live in areas where there are too few health-care providers.

This problem isn't going away. The Association of American Medical Colleges projects that the U.S. faces a shortage of more than 90,000 physicians by 2020. That shortfall will grow to over 130,000 by 2025. These numbers more optimistic than estimates from the American Academy of Family Physicians, which projects a shortage of nearly 149,000 doctors by 2020.

Several factors are driving the need for more physicians. Although the overall U.S. population is growing only modestly, more people translates to demand for more doctors. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of elderly Americans will double by 2030 -- with increased need for medical services.

While demand for physicians increase, one out of every three doctors currently practicing in the U.S. is over age 55. Many of these doctors will retire in the next decade. Medical schools have experienced increased enrollment over the last four years, but the number of potential new doctors isn't enough to offset the other trends.

Daschle and Frist say that Obamacare will make the physician shortage even worse. A report published in the Annals of Family Medicine supports their view. The study projected a physician shortfall of 52,000 by 2025 -- lower than some of the other estimates. However, research data indicated this need for more doctors is 18% higher than it would have been without implementation of Obamacare.

How will Obamacare worsen the physician shortage? The clearest way is through increasing demand for health care itself. If health reform enables 30 million more Americans to gain insurance as intended, these individuals will in all likelihood seek more medical care than before they had insurance. It's this impact that brought Dashle and Frist to agree that Obamacare could lead to more challenges in balancing the supply and demand for physicians.

The former senators point to technology as a key opportunity for solving the problem. Several experts asked recently by the Wall Street Journal about how to address the physician shortage also indicated that use of technology could help, particularly with helping doctors work more efficiently and shifting more care to home settings. Such solutions also present opportunities for investors.

One company working to help make physicians more efficient is athenahealth . In June, health-care research firm KLAS named the company's electronic medical record system as the top-ranked system for physicians in terms of usability, efficiency, and effectiveness. The stock is up 44% year-to-date.

IBM hopes to change the way physicians provide care with its Watson technology. Big Blue is targeting the natural language capabilities, hypothesis generation, and evidence-based learning capabilities of Watson to support doctors in diagnosing and treating patients. What could be interesting is how this technology might also enable other health-care providers such as nurse practitioners and physician assistants to provide higher level of care.

Some observers maintain that the physician shortage is really more of a location problem. Some areas have plenty of doctors while others have too few. Telemedicine is a technology that could help alleviate this issue. Research firm InMedica thinks that the use of telemedicine and related technologies will explode more than 700% by 2017.

Qualcomm looks to be a winner if this prediction comes true. Its Qualcomm Life unit focuses on remote health management. The company's 2Net cloud platform for connecting biometric devices to remotely hosted applications opens the door to a wide array of possibilities for health-care providers to remotely monitor patients.

Even if other solutions are implemented to help solve the nation's doctor dilemma, these technology companies should benefit from increased use of their products. A shortfall in the number of physicians could lead to a windfall for smart investors.

Integrys announced this week that it's selling off one of its hydro dams, marking yet another utility's unease with hydroelectric power. Let's take a closer look to see whether this power company's piddling away profits -- or making smart moves for its future.

Integrys' exit
Integrys subsidiary Wisconsin Public Service is handing over ownership of its Otter Rapids dam to Renewable World Energies, a privately run Midwest company with 22 hydroelectric facilities to its name. According to the press release, Otter Rapids' "size and location" make it a mismatch for Integrys' generation portfolio, despite a regulatory license lasting through 2037.

It seems that one man's trash is another man's treasure, as Renewable World Energies is confident that it will be able to make a series of improvements, optimizing power output for years to come.

Water works?
Integrys' latest move is more and more common in the world of utilities. NextEra Energy made a similar motion last December, when it announced it was selling all 351 MW of its hydro generating assets to Brookfield Renewable Energy Partners, another hydro specialist. NextEra President and CEO Armando Pimentel spoke of the need to "further optimize our power generation portfolio" and concentrate on growth opportunities.

Debt-heavy FirstEnergy is also attempting to exit its 1,180 MW of hydro assets. The company originally wanted out by early 2015 but is attempting to scoot up its schedule to clear cash for its transmission investments. This utility is downsizing fast, as it also announced last month that it will shut down 2,080 MW of coal-fired plants. Hydro currently comprises 9% of total capacity, while the coal plants will knock off another 10%.

All dried up
As the energy sector becomes increasingly competitive, utilities are focusing their generation fleets on what they believe to be winners. Simply put, these companies are looking to specialization and economies of scale to give them a competitive edge.

While a lack of energy diversity might seem like a dumb move, there's more risk in hydro than most investors are aware of. Low reservoir levels at just eight hydro facilities knocked 5% off Duke Energy's Q1 EPS. Rainfall levels have been increasingly erratic around the world, and recent studies are pointing to even less real power for high-capacity hydro plants. In New Zealand, a country dependent on hydro for around 15% of its total capacity, two more weeks of drought last summer would've pushed the entire country into rolling blackouts.

Watering down profits
Hydro isn't dead just yet. Dams provide much-needed baseload energy, and for utilities with strategic assets, they can still help their bottom line. For Integrys, its latest sale won't do much at all. At only 0.5 MW of capacity, the utility still has 82.9 MW of water power to its name. Compared with 1,616 MW of coal and 502 MW of gas and oil assets, hydro's a drop in the bucket. But as other utilities have shown, it may be a drop worth drying up.

Ford's hot-selling Fusion Hybrid has stolen lots of sales from Toyota in 2013. But now Ford's factory is struggling to keep up with demand, and that could cost the Blue Oval. Photo credit: Ford Motor.

Ford has had a solid lead over Toyota in the U.S. market for some time now, and it has gained market share at Toyota's expense in 2013. But July's sales numbers included a surprise: Toyota nearly closed the gap for the first time in ages.

How did that happen? There are a few different factors at work, ranging from Toyota's aggressive moves to reverse its decline in U.S. market share to Ford's ongoing struggles to make enough of its hot products to meet demand. So was July a fluke, or is Toyota about to surge past Ford? In this video, Fool contributor John Rosevear digs into the numbers and gives his take on Ford's prospects for staying ahead of its biggest Japanese rival in the coming months.

This past week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average's best-performing stock was Microsoft , which rose 9.27%, while the worst-performing component was Hewlett-Packard , down 15.21%.

But despite the difference between the big moves each company made this week, they have a lot in common. And I don't believe it would be too much of a stretch to think that in a few weeks or months, the two companies could switch positions, with Microsoft falling and Hewlett-Packard rising.

The most obvious similarity is that Microsoft and HP are both large-cap technology companies. They both generate a good portion of their revenue from the PC industry, and they've both seen PC sales falter, thus hurting their main source of revenue and lowering their profits.

With the quick emergence of tablets and smartphones, both companies have also tried moving into mobile computing to offset their PC losses. Neither has had much success so far, but they certainly need to change their focus from the PC business to other opportunities.

Neither company is on the verge of going bankrupt and falling off the map, but as we've seen so many times before, if Microsoft and HP don't start changing now, they will fall off the map within the next decade. The technology industry is constantly changing and evolving. Companies that get comfortable and lazy get left behind.

The good news for both companies' shareholders is that they're aware of the need to change, and change now. HP in particular has been attempting to change its business for almost two years now, as CEO Meg Whitman leads her team down the turnaround path she's laid out. The stock took a hit this week after Whitman said HP won't grow revenue in 2014, a reversal from her previous outlook. But the stock is still up 57.19% since the start of 2013, and there's a long way to go before Whitman wraps up her five-year turnaround plan. Time will tell if the team at HP can right the ship and get sales and profits growing again despite a dying PC business.

As for Microsoft, shares went wild on the announcement that CEO Steve Ballmer will retire within the next 12 months. I think Ballmer's exit is a sign that Microsoft understands the need to change directions if it wants to remain an industry leader.

Still, don't be surprised if the tables turn for these companies down the road. HP could jump higher as its turnaround plan plays out, and Microsoft could tank if a new CEO comes in and things appear worse than investors thought they were. Don't be shocked. These things happen. 

Both of the major stock market indexes have not only recovered from the financial crisis. They have proceeded to new heights.

Although the Dow Jones Industrial Average is down from its recent all-time peak, it continues to trade over the 15,000-point threshold. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 has, at least for the moment, settled above 1,600 points.

But far from being something to celebrate, it forces us to ask: Are stocks too high?

To appreciate why this is a concern, one need only glance at the preceding figure, which charts the daily closing price of the S&P 500 going back to 1950. There's a disturbing trend developing that consists of wild booms and busts.

First there was the dot-com bubble. Then the housing debacle. And now, at least insofar as the chart seems to suggest, we've found ourselves in yet another nearly identical situation.

The support for this proposition is twofold. In the first case, and particularly since last September, the Federal Reserve has pumped $85 billion a month into the bond markets. Doing so has driven bond prices higher and therefore, at least presumably, increased the flow of funds into equities. Once this spigot is turned off, it's widely assumed that stock prices will respond in kind.

And in the second case, there's no getting around the fact that valuations are higher than the long-run average. As of Friday, the S&P 500 was trading at 17.83 times earnings. And if you take the past 10 years into consideration, it's an even dearer 23.77 times earnings as of the middle of this month. By comparison, the average multiple since the 1880s is only 16.49 times earnings.

The one thing that can be said in favor of current equity prices, on the other hand, is that corporate earnings are increasing. As the following chart shows, corporate profits have climbed to around 11% of gross domestic product, far and away the highest level ever.

So how should you reconcile these points? I think the proper conclusion is that stocks are indeed priced too dearly. But whether you should respond is another question altogether. If you've established a consistent pattern of investing irrespective of cycles, then this shouldn't throw you off kilter.

If you have yet to do so, however, and are just now considering it, then you'd be wise to think twice before taking the plunge at today's valuations.

Dividend investors would be wise to focus not just on a stock's current yield, but also on the long-term growth potential of its dividends. That's because strong businesses that consistently raise their dividend payouts reward shareholders with a steadily rising income stream that essentially equates to a raise every year. And, well, who doesn't like a raise?

But there are other reasons to value dividend growth so highly, and they're well supported by research. For instance, a study by C. Thomas Howard published in Advisor Perspectives found that for every percentage point a stock's yield rises, its annual return increases by 0.22 percentage points if it's a large cap, 0.25 if it's a mid cap, and 0.46 if it's a small cap. Even better, Howard found that dividend-growing stocks outperformed dividend cutters by 10 percentage points per year from 1973 to 2010 and beat both flat- and no-dividend stocks. And the icing on the cake is that Howard showed that this outperformance came with a third less volatility. Higher returns, less volatility-induced stress, and a steadily growing income stream -- what's not to love?

With that in mind, here are five stocks that have grown their dividends by 15% or more over the past year:

Source: S&P Capital IQ.

Yum! Brands is the company behind quick-service restaurants such as KFC, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell. While the company is based in the U.S., it's very much a global operation, with 39,000 restaurants spread across 125 countries and territories. Yum! Brands currently has a four-star ranking on CAPS and offers investors a 1.8% yield.

Ross Stores operates two chains of off-price retail apparel and home accessories stores, under the Ross Dress for Less and dd's DISCOUNTS brand names in the United States. They target value-conscious women and men between 18 and 54, primarily from middle-income households. Ross Stores currently sports a four-star rating in CAPS and is paying a growing 1% dividend.

Darden Restaurants owns and operates full-service restaurants in the United States and Canada, including Red Lobster, Olive Garden, LongHorn Steakhouse, The Capital Grille, Bahama Breeze, Seasons 52, Eddie V's Prime Seafood, and Wildfish Seafood Grille. Darden Restaurants currently has only a two-star rating in CAPS, but it offers investors a tasty 4.3% yield.

B&G Foods manufactures, sells, and distributes shelf-stable foods and household products in the United States, Canada, and Puerto Rico. Some of its offerings include canned beans, pickles, meat spreads, gourmet salad dressings, hot cereals, fruit-based spreads, sauces, and syrups. CAPS participants have awarded B&G Foods with the highest five-star rating, and the company is paying out a solid 3.7% dividend.

Apache is an independent energy company that explores for, develops, and produces natural gas, crude oil, and natural gas liquids. This Fool favorite has a top five-star CAPS rating and offers investors a rising 1% dividend.

The Foolish bottom line
Had you invested in these companies a year ago, you would have enjoyed total dividend increases ranging from 15% to nearly 18%. That level of growth would provide a substantial boost to just about any investor's dividend income. But more important to investors today is to identify the companies that will grow their dividends substantially in the years ahead. If you're interested in hearing about some excellent companies that are likely to boost their dividends from this point forward, I'd like to offer you 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 discover the identities of these companies before the rest of the market catches on, you can access this valuable free report by simply clicking here now.

Every investor has heard the old line "sell in May and go away." That wasn't such great advice this year with the S&P 500 index up nearly 5% since the beginning of May. And even if it were a good idea, it would be too late now if you didn't heed it before summer started.

However, we will enter a new season next month. Since I focus primarily on health care, I'm especially interested in any seasonal effects on stocks in the industry. Maybe we need a new adage, perhaps "health care stocks fall in the fall"? Could this be a better investing mantra? Let's take a Foolish look.

Proxies
If we wanted to do a statistically significant study, we'd need to look at lots of health-care stocks over decades of market history to see if there is any seasonal effect. That doesn't seem like too much fun, does it? Instead of spending more hours than any sane person would give up for an admittedly whimsical effort, I opted to take a shortcut. 

Rather than review dozens of stocks, I chose a handful to serve as proxies for the health care industry as a whole. I picked Pfizer to represent the pharmaceutical group. Pfizer has a huge market cap of more than $200 billion and tracks pretty well with other big pharma stocks.

Health care doesn't consist of pure pharmaceuticals alone, though. We need to throw a biotech into the mix as well. I went with Amgen as our biotech proxy. It's one of the largest biotechs and has plenty of history under its belt.

It was a tough decision on which medical device company to include. After mulling it over, I thought that we needed to be able to claim that there was at least something scientific about this study -- so I chose Boston Scientific . The company has a market cap of around $15 billion and revenue of more than $7 billion, so it's a reasonable representative for the medical device makers.

We wouldn't have health care in the U.S. as we know it without insurers. I figured we should just go with the biggest of the bunch -- UnitedHealth Group . Generally speaking, as UnitedHealth goes, so goes the health insurance industry.

My final selection for the analysis combines two areas of health care in one stock. McKesson is one of the largest medical supply distributors but also is a major player in the health information technology market.

If you recall, we would ideally review decades of market history. That's what I did -- but just barely. I looked at the stock performance for each of the five proxy companies for the fall seasons of 1993 through 2012. There was one exception that should be noted, however. McKesson went public in 1994, so the analysis didn't go back a full two decades for this one stock.

So, do health care stocks fall in the fall? Sometimes, but not usually.

Source: YCharts.

As the chart above shows, all five of our proxy stocks experienced more fall seasons with positive gains than they did seasons with losses over the last 20 years. Pfizer and UnitedHealth did best in the "up years" count. However, none of the health-care stocks had as many positive fall periods as the S&P 500 index did.

Merely counting the number of up and down years doesn't tell the full story, though. Seven to nine down years that were really bad could make those 11 to 13 up years look less positive.

Source: YCharts.

Source: YCharts.

Only Boston Scientific and McKesson experienced overall negative performance during the fall seasons over the last two decades. The negative average performance of the S&P 500 during down years outweighed the positive average performance of the up years, but the index still performed well cumulatively because there were over twice as many up years. UnitedHealth and Pfizer boast the best fall seasons of all.

I'm afraid that the "health care stocks fall in the fall" phrase appears to be a bust. Actually, perhaps a better adage might be "buy health care stocks in the fall and have a ball." Some of those fall gains over the last 20 years look mighty tempting. Even that line doesn't work across the board, though.

What this little exercise doesn't show is how well these stocks did over the entire two decades. The worst performer, Boston Scientific, still gained more than 130% during the period. The best stock, Amgen, soared nearly 1400%.

Whatever month it is, if you think with a long-term perspective -- you'll be better off. So, here goes one more stab at creating a new investing line: Remember in September adages fall and burn like timber. You can even use this one in December, but it would be even better to keep it in mind year-round.

With the SPDR S&P Biotech Index up 37% over the trailing-12-month period, it's evident that investment dollars are willingly flowing into the biotech sector. Keeping that in mind, let's have a look at some of the rulings, studies, and companies that made waves in the sector last week.

As always, let's start off with some of the positive stories we witnessed this week.

Supernus Pharmaceuticals soared as much as 27% on Monday after announcing the approval of extended-release epilepsy drug, Trokendi XR, by the Food and Drug Administration. The clearly good news here is that Trokendi is approved in patients as young as six years of age, with Supernus being granted a waiver on certain pediatric study requirements. With Trokendi XR and Oxtellar XR now approved for the treatment of epilepsy, Supernus projects it'll be breakeven on a cash flow basis by the end of next year. While certainly good news, quarterly losses will continue in the interim and, given that reality, shareholders wound up giving back nearly all of its early week gains by the end of the week.

In a similar instance of great news, Incyte shares skyrocketed after announcing positive proof-of-concept data from a phase 2a clinical study of ruxolitinib in cases of refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer. The data from the study in which ruxolitinib (the scientific name for Jakafi, Incyte's FDA-approved myelofibrosis drug) was combined with Roche's Xeloda demonstrated six-month survival of 42% for the ruxolitinib arm as compared to just 11% for the placebo. In addition, only the ruxolitinib arm showed any durable tumor response and significant improvement in body weight.

Not to be lost on this news, either, is Novartis which is the global licensing holder to ruxolitinib outside the United States. Novartis recently lost patent exclusivity to its best-selling hypertensive drug, Diovan, and is definitely looking for ways to bolster its product pipeline. If ruxolitinib, a JAK1 and JAK 2 inhibitor, continues to show progress in trials, I wouldn't be shocked to see Novartis simply snatch up Incyte and keep 100% of sales. Shares of Incyte gained 30% this week while Novartis' shares added 4%.

Rounding out the good news this week with a solid gain of 20% was Pain Therapeutics , which rallied after Pfizer announced that it would indeed be running another clinical trial for painkiller Remoxy. The Remoxy saga, which was developed by Pain Therapeutics, is licensed to Pfizer and incorporates DURECT's gel-capsule technology, seems to be right up there next to Days of Our Lives for longest running daytime drama. Remoxy has been rejected twice by the FDA with the original new drug application having been filed all the way back in June 2008. Not to count my chickens before they're hatched, but I'm not going to hold my breath on the outcome of this new trial.

And then there was GTx , this week's disaster du jour. GTx shares fell a whopping 65% on the week after a late-stage study of its lead drug enobosarm failed to meet either of its primary endpoints of improving body mass and physical function for non-small cell lung cancer patients. GTx did note an improvement in lean body mass in one of its two trials, but it wasn't enough to meet the primary endpoint of significance in either of its cancer-induced muscle wasting trials. With both of GTx's lead drugs failing to be approved since 2010, GTx's options are quickly running out.

LONDON -- It's been a week of two halves for the FTSE 100 , as it slumped 133 points (1.7%) to a low of 6,387 on Wednesday on fears of "tapering" of economic stimulus policies. But when the Federal Reserve failed to deliver the dreaded announcement, the index of top U.K. stocks turned back up and ended Friday at 6,492 -- that's just 8 points down on the week, but it does mark the FTSE's third week of losses in a row. Which were the biggest individual movers? Here's a quick look.

Wolseley
Rumors of a possible special dividend from Wolseley sent the plumbing and heating merchant's stock up 197 pence (6.2%) over the week, to end Friday at 3,354 pence. Business in the company's U.S. markets is strong, and according to UBS, which upped its price target to 3,500 pence, Wolseley apparently has around 200 million to 300 million pounds it could return to shareholders. That could amount to between 70 and 110 pence per share.

IMI
First-half results gave specialist engineer IMI a nice boost, with its price gaining 70 pence (4.9%) to 1,504 pence. Although revenue remained flat at 1,087 million pounds, operating profit was up 5% to 162 million pounds thanks to improvements in margins, and the interim dividend was lifted 8% to 12.8 pence per share. The company says it is optimistic about the second half, telling us it expects to "deliver good progress in 2013."

John Wood Group
Energy-services company John Wood Group suffered a fall of 60.5 pence (6.9%) to finish at 822.5 pence, despite reporting better revenue and profits in its first six months and telling us it anticipates full-year results will be in line with expectations. The dividend was boosted by 25% too, to 7.1 cents per share. But the company did tell us that some project delays, and weakness in Canada, could present "challenges to growth in 2014," and that seems to be what did the damage.

Persimmon
Housebuilder Persimmon reported a 40% rise in underlying first-half profits to 135 million pounds, with the U.K. government's "Help to Buy" scheme getting more people back to the housing market. The company also said it is accelerating its plan to return surplus cash to shareholders -- 75 pence per share has already been paid, and 10 pence in advance of the next planned payment of 95 pence will be handed over in June next year. The result for the stock price? A fall of 55 pence (4.6%) to 1,133 pence, but it's still up more than 60% over 12 months.

What now?
Dividends form a core part of many a successful long-term portfolio. Whether you need that income to live on, or want to reinvest it for the long term, there's nothing wrong with collecting robust and attractive payouts. And that's what the Fool's top U.K. analysts have been looking for.

In fact, they have uncovered a stock offering a yield of 5%, which they have declared their "Top Income Stock for 2013." The full in-depth report is free and can be accessed immediately -- just click here.

The Motley Fool is helping Britain invest. Better. And with the economy so uncertain, we're urging everyone to read "10 Steps to Making a Million in the Market" -- it may transform your wealth. Click here now to request your free, no-obligation copy.

Further Motley Fool investment opportunities:

• The One U.K. Share Warren Buffett Loves
• Eight Stocks Held by Britain's Super Investor
• The Market's Top Sectors

Last month, we saw a drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico go up in flames. You may not have heard about it, though, because that rig was drilling for natural gas, so the threat of environmental damage was much smaller than that for oil. While it can be difficult to put a figure to the environmental damage from an oil spill, we try to assign some monetary value as though the dollars spent can compensate for the damage it does. Today, we as a society have become less tolerant of spills, and the costs a company can incur are becoming very prohibitive.

A recent oil sands spill from a pipeline in Michigan operated by Enbridge Energy Partners  has resulted in cleanup costs of $830 million, or about $41,000 per barrel spilled. This figure is much higher than the cleanup costs for the Deepwater Horizon, which averaged about $3,200 per barrel spilled. What Enbridge should also be frightened of is any litigation that may arise from this spill. When all of the cleanup, lawsuits, development funds, and litigation is complete for the Deepwater Horizon spill, BP could end up spending as much as $96 billion. 

The risk of an oil spill can come from a wide range of areas -- well blowouts, bad weather, misread navigation charts, or military action. There are several factors to consider that will also determine the total cost of the spill. The seven largest oil spills to ever happen, as shown in the following slideshow, serve as a hefty reminder that the threat of oil spills are very real and the costs for these spills can cripple a company for years.

Although we don't believe in timing the market or panicking over market movements, we do like to keep an eye on big changes -- just in case they're material to our investing thesis.

What: Shares of Uni-Pixel  rose by nearly 12% in Tuesday's early intraday trading after analysts at Cowen wrote construction for the company's new plant with Kodak to produce sensors based on Uni-Pixel's UniBoss sensor film appears to be on track to produce around 1 million units per month by the end of 2013. However, Uni-Pixel gave back much of those gains as the day wore on to close up just 3.4% as the wider market retreated. 

So what: Uni-Pixel shareholders have endured quite a ride over the past several months. First, Uni-Pixel shares popped by around 20% when the original agreement with Kodak was announced in April. Then, they plunged 26% in May after rumors surfaced that Apple could become a direct competitor, only to rise by nearly 11% after analysts defended the company's position and it received a $5 million milestone payment from Eastman Kodak to facilitate the development.

Today's pop, then, surely comes as a welcome sign as investors are happy everything still appears to be on track. 

Now what: Even so, the stock currently sits more than 56% below its 52-week-high above $41 per share set in April -- a drop that predictably resulted in at least one class action lawsuit on behalf of burned purchasers of Uni-Pixel near those highs. However, considering the company expects the market for these sensors could grow as large as $32 billion by 2018, it's safe to say patient long-term shareholders could still stand to be handsomely rewarded going forward.

Luxury hotel and resort operator Strategic Hotels & Resorts announced today its third-quarter dividend on three series of cumulative redeemable preferred stock.

• 8.5% Series A --  $0.53125 per share
• 8.25% Series B -- $0.51563 per share
• 8.25% Series C -- $0.51563 per share

The board of directors said the quarterly dividends are payable on September 30 to holders of record at the close of business on September 13. Strategic Hotels & Resorts does not pay a regular dividend on its common stock.