Best money market account rates today, July 19, 2025 (best account provides 4.41% APY)
Overview of money market account rates today
The national average money market account rate stands at 0.62%, according to the FDIC. This might not seem like much, but consider that three years ago, it was just 0.07%. So by historical standards, money market account rates are still quite high.
Even so, some of the top accounts are currently offering over 4% APY. Since these rates may not be around much longer, consider opening a money market account now to take advantage of today's high rates.
Here's a look at some of the top MMA rates available today:Additionally, the table below features some of the best savings and money market account rates available today from our verified partners.
This embedded content is not available in your region.
How much will $10,000 make in a money market account?
The amount of interest you can earn from a money market account depends on the annual percentage rate (APY). This is a measure of your total earnings after one year when considering the base interest rate and how often interest compounds (money market account interest typically compounds daily).
Say you put $10,000 in an MMA at the average interest rate of 0.64% with daily compounding. At the end of one year, your balance would grow to $10,064.20 — your initial $10,000 deposit, plus $64.20 in interest.
Now let's say you choose a high-yield money market account that offers 4% APY instead. In this case, your balance would grow to $10,408.08 over the same period, which includes $408.08 in interest.
Frequently asked questions about money market account rates
What is the downside of a money market account?
Compared to a traditional savings account, a money market account may come with more restrictions. For example, money market accounts often require a higher minimum balance in order to earn the best interest rate and/or avoid fees. Certain MMAs may also limit the number of withdrawals you can make per month (typically six).
Which bank gives 7% interest on savings accounts?
In general, there are no banks that offer a 7% interest rate on money market accounts or any other type of deposit account. That said, you may be able to find local banks and credit unions running limited-time promotional rates on certain accounts, which could be as high as 7%. However, promotional rates at this level often apply to a limited balance.
Read more: Do 7% interest savings accounts exist anymore?
This embedded content is not available in your region.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
15 minutes ago
- Forbes
To Win Or Not To Win The AI Race. The Question To End All Questions
WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 23: U.S. President Donald Trump displays a signed executive order during the ... More "Winning the AI Race" summit hosted by All‑In Podcast and Hill & Valley Forum at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on July 23, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump signed executive orders related to his Artificial Intelligence Action Plan during the event. (Photo by) When President Donald Trump announced Winning the AI Race: America's AI Action Plan yesterday, he said something we should all remember: 'America is the country that started the AI race. And as president of the United States, I'm here today to declare that America is going to win it.' These are important words to remember because it may be the last time, Trump and his Big Tech partners in Silicon Valley acknowledge that AI wasn't always a question of winning or losing a race. To Win Or Not To Win Is Not The Only Question Once AI was a philosophical question – one that religious and spiritual thinkers from ancient cultures asked to better understand the laws of nature. Later it became a scientific question – one that English mathematicians and computer scientitsts asked to transcend the laws of nature. And lately, it has become everyone's question – one that ethicists, policy makers, journalists, educators, you, and I ask to protect the nature in and around us that AI threatens to replace. But – Trump claims – AI is no longer a question. It's a race. A race started by America that America is going to win. Why? Because, as Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, puts it, 'winning the AI race is non-negotiable.' And once something is non-negotiable, all questions about it ends. So what are the questions America's AI Action Plan is designed to end? And why is it important that we keep asking them? The AI Race Ends Questions About Regulations The plan identifies over 90 Federal policy actions across three pillars – Accelerating Innovation, Building American AI Infrastructure, and Leading in International Diplomacy and Security. One key policy is enabling innovation and adoption by 'removing onerous Federal regulations that hinder AI development and deployment, and seek private sector input on rules to remove.' In yesterday's summit Trump commented on this initiative, saying the AI industry is 'a beautiful baby that's born.' 'We have to grow that baby and let that baby thrive. We can't stop it. We can't stop it with politics, we can't stop it with foolish rules,' Trump said. Talking about AI development as something that cannot be stopped is one thing. Comparing the tech industry with a baby whose growth and well-being we are responsible for is another. And maybe that's where our questions should start: Where our understanding of nature meets our understanding of technology. Is it the same to be 'born to think' and to be 'built to think'? Do babies and AI technologies follow the same laws of nature? Do they have the same constraints? And can the questions asked by philosophers, religious thinkers, and scientists in the past guide us in navigating the need for restrictions and regulations in the future? At the AI Action Plan summit, President Trump said the tech industry is 'a beautiful baby" that we ... More have to grow and let thrive. (Photo by Joe Mahoney) The AI Race Ends Questions About Existential Risks According to the White House's website, 'winning the AI race will usher in a new golden age of human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security for the American people.' But it doesn't say what this golden age of human flourishing should look like. In fact, the Trump administration's understanding of AI seems to built on the idea that technology can and should be neutral. No human ideas and ideals. Just pure innovation. Or, as it says in the plan's 'upholding free speech in frontier models' section: Federal procurement guidelines must be updated to 'ensure that the government only contracts with frontier language model developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down idealogical bias.' But this idea that technology can and should be neutral can and should be questioned. For decades the developers of first the internet and then social media have promised us free speech and systems that are objective and free from top-down idealogical bias. And for decades, we have seen an increase in mental health problems caused by misinformation and polarization. So, maybe that's the questions we must ask: How does it impact humans to think and talk about technology as something that doesn't impact humans? Is it possible to let the tech industry grow and thrive and at the same time take responsibility for human growth and well-being? Or will a country that prioritizes to be front runners in building technological systems eventually lose sight of what it takes to build human systems, e.g. in terms of education, health, and ultimately democracy? The AI Race Ends Questions About Global Collaboration 'Whether we like it or not, we're suddenly engaged in a fast-paced competition to build and define this groundbreaking technology that will determine so much about the future of civilization itself,' Trump said at the AI Action Plan event. To prepare for this future, the government will partner with US tech companies to make 'full stack AI export packages' — AI models, hardware and software — available to American ally countries. As reported by CNN, this partnership aims at making US technology the global standard, something Silicon Valley leaders have called for to ensure the United States remains an AI leader. But if AI really is this 'groundbreaking technology that will determine so much about the future of civilization itself', other countries are not looking to the US for a 'full stack AI export package'. And they are certainly not looking to Silicon Valley for global leadership and standards. Dealing with a groundbreaking technology that will determine the future of civilization itself calls for everyone to work together. And that calls for all of us to ask: Should staying ahead of China be the top priority for the American administration right now? Or does AI call for an intergovernmental organization like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that promotes the safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear technology? Established in 1957, IAEA was not influenced by Big Tech. The Agency's genesis was President Eisenhower's 'Atoms for Peace' address to the General Assembly of the United Nations on 8 December 1953. Is that what the world needs from the president of the United States? Not a declaration that America is going to win a race it started itself. And not a full stack AI export package. But an 'AI for Peace' address that crystallizes the hope that the groundbreaking development of AI 'may lead to the unifying of the entire divided world' (Eisenhower's words about the splitting of the atom)? To win or not to win the AI race is not the only question. There are many questions and none of them should be answered by one president of one country. Least of all in a plan designed to be non-negotiable.
Fast Company
2 hours ago
- Fast Company
Trump rollback on clean energy subsidies stalls major solar, wind projects and manufacturing plans
Singapore-based solar panel manufacturer Bila Solar is suspending plans to double capacity at its new factory in Indianapolis. Canadian rival Heliene's plans for a solar cell facility in Minnesota are under review. Norwegian solar wafer maker NorSun is evaluating whether to move forward with a planned factory in Tulsa, Oklahoma. And two fully permitted offshore wind farms in the U.S. Northeast may never get built. These are among the major clean energy investments now in question after Republicans agreed earlier this month to quickly end U.S. subsidies for solar and wind power as part of their budget megabill, and as the White House directed agencies to tighten the rules on who can claim the incentives that remain. This marks a policy U-turn since President Donald Trump's return to office that project developers, manufacturers and analysts say will slash installations of renewable energy over the coming decade, kill investment and jobs in the clean energy manufacturing sector supporting them, and worsen a looming U.S. power supply crunch as energy-hungry AI infrastructure expands. Solar and wind installations could be 17% and 20% lower than previously forecast over the next decade because of the moves, according to research firm Wood Mackenzie, which warned that a dearth of new supplies could slow the expansion of data centers needed to support AI technology. Energy researcher Rhodium, meanwhile, said the law puts at risk $263 billion of wind, solar, and storage facilities and $110 billion of announced manufacturing investment supporting them. It will also increase industrial energy costs by up to $11 billion in 2035, it said. 'One of the administration's stated goals was to bring costs down, and as we demonstrated, this bill doesn't do that,' said Ben King, a director in Rhodium's energy and climate practice. He added the policy 'is not a recipe for continued dominance of the U.S. AI industry.' The White House did not respond to a request for comment. The Trump administration has defended its moves to end support for clean energy by arguing the rapid adoption of solar and wind power has created instability in the grid and raised consumer prices – assertions that are contested by the industry and which do not bear out in renewables-heavy power grids, like Texas' ERCOT. Power industry representatives, however, have said all new generation projects need to be encouraged to meet rising U.S. demand, including both those driven by renewables and fossil fuels. Consulting firm ICF projects that U.S. electricity demand will grow by 25% by 2030, driven by increased AI and cloud computing – a major challenge for the power industry after decades of stagnation. The REPEAT Project, a collaboration between Princeton University and Evolved Energy Research, projects a 2% annual increase in electricity demand. With a restricted pipeline of renewables, tighter electricity supplies stemming from the policy shift could increase household electricity costs by $280 a year in 2035, according to the REPEAT Project. The key provision in the new law is the accelerated phase-out of 30% tax credits for wind and solar projects: it requires projects to begin construction within a year or enter service by the end of 2027 to qualify for the credits. Previously the credits were available through 2032. Now some project developers are scrambling to get projects done while the U.S. incentives are still accessible. But even that strategy has become risky, developers said. Days after signing the law, Trump directed the Treasury Department to review the definition of 'beginning of construction.' A revision to those rules could overturn a long-standing practice giving developers four years to claim tax credits after spending just 5% of project costs. Treasury was given 45 days to draft new rules. 'With so many moving parts, financing of projects, financing of manufacturing is difficult, if not impossible,' said Martin Pochtaruk, CEO of Heliene. 'You are looking to see what is the next baseball bat that's going to hit you on the head.' About face Heliene's planned cell factory, which could cost as much as $350 million, depending on the capacity, and employ more than 600 workers, is also in limbo, Pochtaruk said in an interview earlier this month. The company needs more clarity on both what the new law will mean for U.S. demand, and how Trump's trade policy will impact the solar industry. 'We have a building that is anxiously waiting for us to make a decision,' Pochtaruk said. Similarly, Mick McDaniel, general manager of Bila Solar, said 'a troubling level of uncertainty' has put on hold its $20 million expansion at an Indianapolis factory it opened this year that would create an additional 75 jobs. 'NorSun is still digesting the new legislation and recent executive order to determine the impact to the overall domestic solar manufacturing landscape,' said Todd Templeton, director of the company's U.S. division that is reviewing plans for its $620 million solar wafer facility in Tulsa. Five solar manufacturing companies – T1 Energy, Imperial Star Solar, SEG Solar, Solx and ES Foundry – said they are also concerned about the new law's impact on future demand, but that they have not changed their investment plans. The policy changes have also injected fresh doubt about the fate of the nation's pipeline of offshore wind projects, which depend heavily on tax credits to bring down costs. According to Wood Mackenzie, projects that have yet to start construction or make final investment decisions are unlikely to proceed. Two such projects, which are fully permitted, include a 300-megawatt project by developer US Wind off the coast of Maryland and Iberdrola's 791 MW New England Wind off the coast of Massachusetts. Neither company responded to requests for comment. 'They are effectively ready to begin construction and are now trapped in a timeline that will make it that much harder to be able to take advantage of the remaining days of the tax credits,' said Hillary Bright, executive director of offshore wind advocacy group Turn Forward.
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
Tesla's stock is tumbling after Elon Musk failure to shift the narrative
Elon Musk's big promises apparently no longer seem to be enough for many Tesla investors. Shares of Tesla (TSLA) fell 9% on Thursday following another dismal earnings report, released after the bell Wednesday. Tesla's earnings and revenue both fell by double-digit percentages following the biggest sales drop in the company's history. The automaker also faces a number of financial headwinds, including the loss of a $7,500 tax credit for US EV buyers starting in October, and the vanishing market for regulatory credit sales, which has earned Tesla $11 billion since 2019. But Tesla CEO Elon Musk barely talked about that on the earnings call Wednesday, although he did acknowledge the company 'probably could have a few rough quarters.' Instead, he talked about his grand vision for the future, including Tesla's long-promised robotaxi service; and its humanoid robot, Optimus, which is still in development. The lack of details about the company's plans to solve problems in the near term disappointed some investors and analysts. 'Investors have been very forgiving of Tesla for several quarters now, despite obvious headwinds to their business,' Garrett Nelson, analyst at CFRA Research, told CNN Thursday. 'But I think its investors are taking a more realistic view of the story at this point. Some of his brilliance has been his ability to keep investors focused on the long term and ignoring the near term and intermediate term. Now, headwinds are difficult to ignore.' Nelson downgraded the company's stock to a neutral rating in April. But even some of the Tesla bulls on Wall Street are saying that the time for Musk to take action is running out. 'The street is losing some patience,' Wedbush Securities tech analyst Dan Ives told CNN Thursday, although he said he still believes in the autonomous vehicle and artificial intelligence vision laid out by Musk and Tesla. Musk has made big promises about his robotaxi service, including that it would be in service within a year as early as 2019. Tesla's robotaxis finally rolled out in June this year, albeit in a limited portion of Austin, Texas, to friends and fans of the company, and with an employee sitting beside the empty driver's seat. However, that limited rollout wasn't enough to stop Musk from making extraordinary claims on Wednesday that the service would be available to half the nation's population by year's end. To achieve that, Tesla will need to get regulatory permission to operate in two states per week through the rest of the year, including New York, which does not allow autonomous vehicles on its roads. Morningstar analyst Seth Goldstein said that while he does believe Tesla will eventually be successful in its robotaxi venture, 'the software will require further testing' and he does not expect a full robotaxi product until 2028. But Musk has a history of making grand promises that do not pan out. Like the Cybertruck – the only new vehicle Tesla has offered in the last six years. Musk said Tesla was supposed to be delivering 250,000 vehicles annually by this year. But full-year sales of the Cybertruck and Tesla's two other expensive models were less than 80,000. Sales of the three plunged 52% in the most recent quarter. Tesla also started the year forecasting it would achieve higher sales following its first annual sales drop in its history in 2024. But after two quarters of record sales declines, most investors now assume that it will not meet that goal either. And with Musk himself barely mentioning car sales during an hour-long conference call, it doesn't appear that is enough for shareholders any longer. 'We are mixed on Tesla's ability to meet its robotaxi timelines, cost targets, and scale,' wrote Ben Kallo, an analyst for Baird, in a note to clients late Wednesday. 'So far Tesla has received a pass due to how ambitious/revolutionary these products are, but we think continued sluggishness in the auto business could cause more focus on the near term.'
