NEW YORK — U.S. financial markets are closed Monday, Sept. 7, in observance of Labor Day, with both the New York Stock Exchange and the Nasdaq suspending trading for the federal holiday before resuming normal operations Tuesday morning.

Labor Day is one of 10 official holidays the NYSE and Nasdaq observe each year, and it consistently falls on the first Monday in September. This year’s observance lines up with the federal holiday designated by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, which also closes government offices, banks and postal services nationwide.

Trading on both major exchanges will resume at their standard 9:30 a.m. Eastern time opening bell Tuesday, Sept. 8, following the closure. Regular U.S. stock market hours run from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday, with both exchanges also closed on weekends year-round.

Bond markets are following the same closure schedule Monday, in line with guidance from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the trade group representing securities firms, banks and asset managers. Bond markets close on nine of the same 10 stock market holidays each year, the lone exception being Good Friday, and also close for Columbus Day and Veterans Day, two federal holidays the stock exchanges themselves remain open for.

Investors looking ahead to the rest of 2026 have three more scheduled market closures remaining on the calendar. The NYSE and Nasdaq will close for Thanksgiving Day on Thursday, Nov. 26, and for Christmas Day on Friday, Dec. 25. Both exchanges will also observe two abbreviated trading sessions this year, closing early at 1 p.m. Eastern time on Friday, Nov. 27, the day after Thanksgiving, and again on Thursday, Dec. 24, Christmas Eve.

While U.S. equity markets sit idle Monday, several major international exchanges are continuing normal operations. According to reporting compiled ahead of the holiday, the London Stock Exchange, the Shanghai Stock Exchange and Hong Kong’s Stock Exchange are all open for regular trading Monday, since Labor Day is a specifically American holiday not observed by those markets. Canada’s Toronto Stock Exchange, by contrast, is closed alongside U.S. markets, given that Canada observes its own Labor Day on the same date.

For investors who prefer to keep trading regardless of the holiday, cryptocurrency markets remain a notable exception to the closure. Unlike traditional stock exchanges, cryptocurrency trading platforms operate continuously around the clock, without pausing for federal holidays, weekends or any scheduled closures.

Investors with brokerage accounts do have some limited options for placing orders even while the major exchanges are closed. Extended trading hours allow investors to place buy and sell orders for stocks and exchange-traded funds outside of standard market hours, though brokers generally caution that this comes with added risk. Trading volume during extended or after-hours sessions tends to be considerably lighter than during regular trading hours, which can lead to greater price volatility and increases the chance that an order may not execute in full, or at the price an investor originally intended.

Major American banking institutions are also observing the Labor Day holiday, with branch locations closed at institutions including Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Capital One and Bank of America. Customers seeking in-person banking services will need to wait until branches reopen Tuesday, though most digital and automated banking services, including online banking, mobile apps and ATMs, are expected to remain functional throughout the holiday.

Monday’s closure comes as U.S. markets head into the historically volatile month of September following a solid August. The S&P 500 climbed 2.6% in August, according to available market data, even as September has historically been the weakest month of the year for U.S. equities, with the index averaging a 2.7% decline over the trailing five-year period during that month specifically. That seasonal pattern has led some analysts to caution investors to brace for potential volatility in the weeks following the holiday, even though past performance in any individual month offers no guarantee of how markets will actually behave going forward.

Labor Day itself traces back to legislation signed into law by President Grover Cleveland in 1894, formally establishing the holiday to recognize the economic and social contributions of American workers. The observance predates the modern structure of the NYSE and Nasdaq holiday calendars by decades, though it has long since become one of the standard closures observed by U.S. financial markets each year alongside other major federal holidays.

Looking further ahead, the stock market’s next scheduled closure after Labor Day will not come until Thanksgiving in late November, meaning investors face a lengthy stretch of uninterrupted regular trading days between the two holidays, aside from any unscheduled closures that might arise from severe weather or other extraordinary circumstances. Such unscheduled closures remain historically rare; the NYSE and Nasdaq have closed for more than the standard holiday schedule only a handful of times over the past century, including during Superstorm Sandy in 2012 and in the days immediately following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

For investors wanting to plan around future market closures, the NYSE has already published its holiday calendar extending through 2028, giving traders and portfolio managers ample advance notice of upcoming closures well beyond this year’s remaining schedule. With Monday’s Labor Day closure now underway, U.S. markets are set to reopen Tuesday morning for a full week of regular trading, resuming the normal rhythm of daily market activity following the three-day holiday weekend.

LONDON — Prince William and Princess Kate are deliberately avoiding any “knee-jerk” reaction to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s return to the United Kingdom, according to royal insiders, with experts describing the couple’s calculated restraint as its own kind of message to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

A source told People on Sept. 1 that William and Kate are consciously choosing not to make a fuss over the Sussexes’ move back to Britain, following six years living primarily in the United States.

“They are watching this space. It’s private — they don’t feel the need to say anything or demonstrate anything outwardly,” the source told the outlet.

Kinsey Schofield, host of the YouTube channel “Kinsey Schofield Unfiltered,” told Fox News Digital that Harry and Meghan’s relocation alone will not automatically repair their relationship with senior royals.

“Trust is earned through behavior over time, not by changing your zip code,” Schofield said. “Prince William and Catherine don’t appear to feel any urgency whatsoever. Harry and Meghan made the dramatic decision to return to Britain. That doesn’t mean the Prince and Princess of Wales suddenly have to rearrange their lives around them. If Harry genuinely wants a relationship with his brother again, I suspect William is going to want to see consistency rather than another grand gesture.”

Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told Fox News Digital that the timing and manner of the Sussexes’ return will not necessarily help their standing within the royal family.

“Moving back to Britain, especially in the way they did it and with Harry, we are told, still demanding an apology, won’t get them brownie points with the royal family,” Fitzwilliams said. “However, it does give them the initiative as everyone has been so shocked. William ostentatiously played polo with Catherine supporting him on the day the Sussexes saw the King and Queen and didn’t bother to mention their plans and those fit their children, so we are told.”

Christopher Andersen, author of the book “Kate!,” said William and Kate are unhappy that the Sussexes are once again drawing significant public attention just as their own family navigates a major milestone.

“Just at the moment when their eldest child is leaving home for the first time to start his first year at prep school, the Sussexes land back in the U.K. to stir things up,” Andersen said. “Granted, George isn’t going very far — Eton is a brief stroll down the hill from Windsor Castle and a short ride from the family home, Forest Lodge. But it’s a big deal when a future king enrolls at Eton — when William enrolled there in 1995, it was treated as a major news event. Even though Harry and Meghan have agreed to lie low for the next few weeks, it’s inevitable that they will be a major, and highly unwelcome, distraction.”

Andersen went further, describing outright skepticism within the Wales household toward the Sussexes’ underlying motivations.

“The Prince and Princess of Wales are suspicious of the Sussexes’ motives, to say the least. They are not about to invite Harry and Meghan over for tea any time soon,” Andersen said. “William and Kate are playing it cool publicly, but obviously they are exasperated. They were not prepared for this — certainly not now. There is a great deal of speculation about what Harry and Meghan really are up to — and not just inside the Waleses’ camp. Harry and Meghan’s arrival on the royal family’s doorstep puts the King and Camilla in an awkward position — and for several reasons.”

Andersen argued that King Charles faces a genuine dilemma no matter how he chooses to respond to his younger son’s return.

“If the King welcomes his estranged son back into the royal fold, will William see it as a betrayal — especially after all the damning things Harry wrote about in his memoir Spare?” Andersen said. “Will Charles also risk alienating his subjects, the vast majority of whom want Harry and Meghan to return to the U.S.? Keep in mind that recent polls show Meghan with a 22 percent approval rating in Great Britain. It won’t sit well with nearly 80 percent of the country if the King says all is forgiven. And then there is the issue of security. With Archie and Lilibet attending school in the Cotswolds, the King is going to look awfully heartless if he continues to deny the Sussexes’ royal protection.”

Royal broadcaster Ian Pelham Turner told Fox News Digital he expects public sentiment toward Meghan and Kate to become its own point of ongoing competition.

“Recently I suggested that there was going to be a battle royal between Meghan and Kate over who would eventually win the public crown for the Queen of hearts,” Turner said. “My personal attitude is that William felt comfortable with Harry in America because he could constantly control the narrative for being the future King without any brand interference from his brother.”

Turner suggested the dynamic could grow more contentious behind the scenes going forward.

“In doing so, his vision of the future has allegedly brought disagreement with King Charles to a point where there has been talk of very heated rows,” Turner said. “So, I am not sure there are cool heads with William and Kate who may be hoping that behind the scenes attacks on Meghan again criticizing any aspirations she may have of building a career in Britain may bear fruit.”

The commentary comes as William and Kate continue their own public schedule largely unaffected by the Sussexes’ return, including a recent appearance together at a polo event in Windsor. Harry and Meghan, for their part, are reported to have committed to keeping a low profile in the weeks surrounding Prince George’s start at Eton College, though royal watchers say sustained public and media attention on the Sussexes’ presence in Britain is likely regardless of how much the couple themselves attempt to stay out of the spotlight.

With King Charles facing competing pressures from within his own family and from broader public opinion polling that remains unfavorable toward the Sussexes, royal commentators say the coming weeks and months are likely to offer a clearer picture of whether Harry and Meghan’s return marks the beginning of any genuine reconciliation, or simply a new chapter in a family rift that has persisted since the couple’s initial departure from royal duties in 2020.

BNY Investments is a global, multi-specialist asset management group, underpinned by the strength and resilience of BNY, with its 240-year history and experience. Managing nearly $2 trillion in assets, they offer investment solutions developed and managed by talented asset class specialists, each with distinct philosophies and proven approaches. Note: This account is not managed or monitored by BNY Investments, and any messages sent via Seeking Alpha will not receive a response. For inquiries or communication, please use BNY Investments’ official channels.

A company of Manulife Investment Management, John Hancock Investment Management serves investors through a unique multimanager approach, complementing our extensive in-house capabilities with an unrivaled network of specialized asset managers, backed by some of the most rigorous investment oversight in the industry. The result is a diverse lineup of time-tested investments from a premier asset manager with a heritage of financial stewardship. Note: This account is not managed or monitored by John Hancock Investment Management, and any messages sent via Seeking Alpha will not receive a response. For inquiries or communication, please use John Hancock Investment Management’s official channels.

Investors weighing whether to buy shares of Space Exploration Technologies, better known as SpaceX, are increasingly turning to Warren Buffett’s decades-old investing principles for guidance, even though the legendary Berkshire Hathaway chairman has never publicly commented on the stock and has historically steered clear of technology and space-related businesses.

SpaceX went public in June, immediately becoming the seventh-largest company traded on a U.S. stock exchange following what analysts described as a record-setting initial public offering. The listing briefly made SpaceX CEO Elon Musk the world’s first trillionaire, according to reporting from The Motley Fool. Shares now trade on the Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, and the stock has since experienced substantial volatility, including a notable price crash in the weeks following its debut.

Buffett has long emphasized the importance of investors staying within what he calls a “circle of competence,” meaning individuals should generally limit their investments to businesses and industries they genuinely understand. Buffett himself was famously slow to embrace technology investments throughout most of his career, though Berkshire Hathaway did eventually take a significant stake in IBM after watching the company for decades, an investment that ultimately did not perform particularly well for the conglomerate.

Investment writer Christopher Ruane, writing for The Motley Fool’s UK operation, said he has applied that same framework to his own thinking about whether to invest in SpaceX.

“Buffett stuck to industries and companies he felt he properly understood before investing,” Ruane wrote. “He talked about staying inside his ‘circle of competence.’ Importantly, he also noted that it is possible for someone to grow their circle of competence over time. That matters when it comes to thinking about SpaceX stock. I try to stay inside my circle of competence in the way Buffett discussed. I do not fully understand all of the business, but I feel comfortable that I have a strong enough handle on it to decide whether or not to invest.”

Buffett has repeatedly stated that his aversion to investing in businesses he cannot fully understand is a firm rule rather than a loose guideline. In comments cited by The Motley Fool, Buffett has said in no uncertain terms, “Never invest in a business you cannot understand,” a standard that presents a particular challenge for investors evaluating SpaceX given the company’s increasingly complex corporate structure.

That complexity stems in part from SpaceX’s business spanning multiple distinct operations under one corporate umbrella, including rocket construction and launch services, satellite-based internet provision through its Starlink network, and, following a merger with Musk’s separate company xAI, artificial intelligence and social media operations as well. According to SpaceX’s revised regulatory filing ahead of its IPO, the company estimates it is targeting a combined total addressable market of $28.5 trillion, which it has described as “the largest in human history,” with $22.7 trillion of that figure stemming specifically from enterprise applications rather than its traditional space launch business.

Adding further to the complexity, SpaceX’s filing warned that the company “may issue a significant amount of equity in connection with future transactions,” language that fueled speculation Musk could eventually seek to combine Tesla with SpaceX in some form, a prospect that would further complicate efforts by outside investors to project the company’s future earnings and overall business trajectory.

Beyond the circle-of-competence framework, Buffett has also long emphasized investing in companies with proven, resilient business models and durable competitive advantages, a principle reflected in his historical investments spanning insurance companies and consumer staples businesses such as Coca-Cola. Applying that lens to SpaceX, Ruane pointed to the company’s strong and growing revenue, along with what he described as resilient underlying demand for satellite launches and Starlink’s Wi-Fi provision, both markets he expects to remain substantial over the long term. He also pointed to SpaceX’s proprietary space launch and recapture technology, established customer base and strong brand as factors helping differentiate the company from potential competitors.

Buffett has separately weighed in more directly on how he generally approaches newly public companies, even without commenting specifically on SpaceX. In a 2019 interview referenced by The Motley Fool, Buffett said Berkshire Hathaway had never purchased shares in a company’s initial public offering, reflecting his longstanding skepticism that IPOs are typically structured to benefit the company and its early investors rather than new public shareholders. Buffett has also expressed public admiration for Musk personally, even as he has historically avoided investing in companies carrying the kind of elevated risk and lofty valuation many analysts have attached to SpaceX following its public debut.

The Motley Fool has separately noted that SpaceX continues to report financial losses despite having raised and invested billions of dollars, a pattern the publication compared to the kind of unprofitable, heavily capitalized businesses that Buffett and his late longtime investing partner, Charlie Munger, historically viewed with considerable suspicion. Buffett has offered investors a simple mental exercise for evaluating any potential stock purchase: writing down a clear, specific answer to the prompt “I’m buying this stock because,” and treating an inability to complete that sentence convincingly as a warning sign against making the investment.

Since its June debut, SPCX shares have continued trading with significant volatility, reflecting the broader uncertainty among investors and analysts over how to properly value a company spanning such a wide and rapidly evolving range of business lines. As of recent trading, SpaceX shares were down more than 1% on the day, according to Yahoo Finance UK market data, continuing a pattern of day-to-day price swings that has characterized the stock since its listing.

For everyday investors weighing whether SpaceX belongs in their own portfolios, the recurring conclusion among those applying Buffett’s principles has generally been one of caution rather than outright avoidance, with some, including Ruane, describing SpaceX as sitting close to the edge of their personal circle of competence, but not entirely outside it. Whether that framework ultimately proves useful for evaluating a company as complex and fast-evolving as SpaceX remains an open question that individual investors will likely need to continue weighing for themselves as the stock’s post-IPO volatility continues to play out in the months ahead.