Best savings interest rates today, July 30, 2025 (Earn up to 4.3% APY)
These accounts pay more interest than the typical savings account — as much as 4% APY and higher. Not sure where to find the best savings interest rates today? Read on to find out which banks have the best offers.
What are the best savings rates today?
Historically speaking, savings account interest rates have been high. That said, the rates on traditional savings accounts pale in comparison to those offered for high-yield savings accounts.
For example, the average savings account rate is just 0.42%, while the best savings interest rates are generally around 4% to 4.5% APY.
As of July 30, 2025, the highest savings account rate available from our partners is 4.3% APY. This rate is offered by EverBank and requires no minimum opening deposit.
Here is a look at some of the best savings rates available today from our verified partners:
Will savings interest rates keep going down?
Deposit account rates — including savings rates — are tied to the federal funds rate. This is the target interest rate set by the Federal Reserve; when it increases its target rate, deposit account rates usually increase. And conversely, when the Fed lowers its rate, deposit rates fall.
After multiple interest rate hikes by the Fed in response to skyrocketing inflation, it finally lowered the federal funds rate three times in late 2024. As a result, deposit rates are falling as well.
Experts anticipate that the Fed will cut its target rate two more times in 2025, so we can expect savings account rates to continue falling this year. However, high-yield savings accounts remain one of the best places to safely store cash and earn the best deposit rates available.
Read more: I bond vs. high-yield savings account: Which is better for beating inflation?
Is now a good time to put your money in a savings account?
Choosing where to put your money is an important decision, and there are a few factors you should consider when evaluating your options. A high-yield savings account could make sense if you're looking for a secure place to hold shorter-term savings while earning a solid return. Here are a few key considerations:
Interest rates: One of the most important features of a savings account is the interest rate. It's important to shop around and compare the best offers to ensure your money will grow over time. Considering that savings rates will likely drop in the near future, opening a high-yield savings account now will allow you to take advantage of historically high rates.
Goals: Today's high-yield savings accounts offer rates we haven't seen in more than a decade. That said, savings rates still don't match average returns for the stock market. If you're saving for a long-term goal like retirement, a savings account probably isn't the best place to put your money, since your balance won't grow at a pace that will allow you to reach your target. However, if you're saving for a financial emergency, a down payment on a home or car, gifts for the holiday season, or another short-term goal, a savings account is a great place to hold those funds.
Accessibility: Certain types of accounts and investments may provide higher returns than a savings account, but may make it difficult to access your funds in a pinch. For example, if you put your savings in a certificate of deposit (CD) and need to access the money before the maturity date, you could be subject to an early withdrawal penalty. So, if you want to be able to dip into your savings as needed, a high-yield savings account is likely the better choice.
Security: In most cases, savings accounts are insured by the FDIC up to the federal limit. They also can't lose money due to fluctuations in the market, making them a low-risk option.
Read more: Can you negotiate a higher savings account rate with your bank?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fast Company
a minute ago
- Fast Company
In uncertain times purpose-driven brands have the winning edge
Whether you're sitting at your desk at work or shopping at the grocery store, you can feel it: the shared sense of uncertainty in the air. Economic indicators are shifting; tariffs have impacted trade flows, and experts predict the nation's growth rate may be cut in half. Combined with broad geopolitical instability, this sense of economic uneasiness has seen consumer sentiment dip to its second-lowest point since 1952. In this challenging climate, even industry giants like Target, Walmart, and Apple are forecasting declines in profits and sales. Yet, history shows that periods of uncertainty often spark innovation and resilience. Brands that can adapt, communicate clearly, and build trust with their customers are well positioned not just to endure, but to lead. So, what can business leaders facing such turbulence do to persevere? Return to the compass that always points to a way to growth: delivering for the consumer. Showing up consistently, adapting with purpose, and becoming the steady heartbeat in their customers' increasingly chaotic world. The Power of Purpose in Uncertain Times As a counterbalance to all the bad news, resilient brands can become a source of strength and reassurance by understanding their consumers and delivering positive impact. In times of uncertainty, brands can improve their customers' day-to-day by bringing moments of joy and meaning into their lives. What's more, they can also deepen those consumer connections by demonstrating alignment with customer values and aspirations for the future. New research supports this call to action: 86% of consumers say brands play an important role in delivering a positive human future. But only 15% of companies are actively investing in efforts aligned to that purpose, a gap that speaks volumes. Consumers are quite willing to reward brands they see as positive difference-makers. They're nearly three times more likely to pay a premium, try new products and services, and even forgive mistakes from brands they think are working towards a better world. This is especially true among Gen Z consumers and younger generations, who prioritize brands that align with their ethical and social principles. So, what does it really mean to deliver a 'positive human future,' and how can brands demonstrate the commitment consumers are seeking? It doesn't mean you have to solve every global issue—you just have to show consumers that you understand their challenges and respond in ways that align to their values. When a single headline can shake markets and communities, consumers are looking for something steady to latch onto, and brands have the opportunity to hold strong. Think Big with Small Gestures For brands, this doesn't require a complete overhaul of business strategy or major new investments. It can start with a simple challenge: how can you show up in small, meaningful ways to brighten consumers' days and give them something to look forward to? Consumers today are seeking more than transactions; they want relationships. Nearly 50% of U.S. consumers are willing to pay more for brands that understand and respond to their needs—brands that listen, learn, and use what they hear to deliver amazing experiences. Take Little Spoon, for example. The baby food company didn't build trust by making grand gestures, but instead took the time to collaborate with parents and scientists to ensure parents have a voice in their child's health. They put their money where their mouth is to provide consistent engagement with parents through its ' Is This Normal ' community platform. They created a winning product that reflects real needs and values, showing up consistently for their customers when and where they needed them. They've successfully become more than a packaged good—they're a partner in parenting, building ardent fans through shared values. To follow in similar footsteps, there are several actions brands can take, starting with active listening and reliability. By using customer insights to understand what matters most, brands can reflect those priorities in their messaging and offerings and then communicate those priorities regularly and consistently. This requires ongoing dialogue and genuine responsiveness to customer feedback and changing needs. By ensuring consumers feel seen and heard, brands will not only build a customer base but also a community. This alignment becomes particularly powerful when economic pressures mount, and consumers are making more deliberate choices about where to spend their money. Above all, it's those small moments of joy that will make all the difference. Positive experiences don't require massive budgets, but they do require intentionality. Whether it's unexpected customer service excellence, community-building initiatives, or simply consistent, reliable communication, these moments transform into lasting relationships. Building Tomorrow's Resilient Brands The businesses that struggle during volatile times often share common characteristics: They become reactive rather than proactive, focus inward rather than on customer needs, or stop innovating to avoid risk. It's more important to show up for customers during times of turbulence than when the waters are calm. Every interaction becomes an opportunity to build trust. Every product decision becomes a chance to show values alignment. Every communication becomes a moment to provide clarity and reassurance. In a world where headlines shift by the hour, brands can emerge as a steady beacon. The brands that thrive aren't necessarily the biggest or the loudest, but those that prioritize real connection with their consumers; those that are able to deliver impact in their day-to-day, and in the world they inhabit. When purse strings tighten, brands that build real relationships, spark joy in the uncertainty, and support a positive human future will build the kind of consumer loyalty that pays dividends through good times and bad.
New York Times
18 minutes ago
- New York Times
Economy Updates: After a Weak Jobs Report, Trump Fires That Agency's Commissioner
President Trump said on social media on Friday that he had directed his team to fire Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. President Trump unleashed his fury about weakness in the labor market on Friday, saying without evidence that the data were 'rigged' and that he was firing the Senate-confirmed Department of Labor official responsible for pulling together the numbers each month. In a long post on social media, Mr. Trump said he had directed his team to fire Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, who was confirmed on a bipartisan basis in 2024. Emily Liddel, an associate commissioner for the bureau, confirmed late Friday that Dr. McEntarfer had been fired and that William Wiatrowski, the deputy commissioner, would serve as acting commissioner. The president fired Dr. McEntarfer after the bureau released monthly jobs data showing surprisingly weak hiring in July and large downward revisions to job growth in the previous two months. Economists widely interpreted the report as evidence that Mr. Trump's policies were beginning to take a toll on the economy, though the president insisted in a subsequent post that the country was 'doing GREAT!' Lori Chavez-DeRemer, the labor secretary, echoed Mr. Trump's concerns about Dr. McEntarfer in a post on social media. 'So you know what I did?' Mr. Trump later told reporters, as he claimed the numbers were 'phony.' 'I fired her, and you know what? I did the right thing.' Dr. McEntarfer was appointed to her post by President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in 2023 after a long career at the Census Bureau and other agencies, where she served under presidents of both parties, including Mr. Trump. Among the Republicans who voted to confirm her as commissioner was Vice President JD Vance, who was then an Ohio senator. The firing prompted swift criticism from economists, former government officials and others, who said the removal would further erode trust in government statistics and make it more difficult for policymakers, investors and businesses, who rely on having dependable data about the economy to make decisions. In addition to the monthly jobs numbers, the Bureau of Labor Statistics is responsible for producing data on inflation, wages and other aspects of the economy. William W. Beach, who led the bureau during Mr. Trump's first term, criticized the move to fire Dr. McEntarfer on Friday. 'It's unfortunate,' he said. 'This could set a precedent where bad news on many different fronts is a reason for dismissing a person.' Mr. Beach, who was appointed by Mr. Trump in 2019 and remained in the role for the first two years of the Biden administration, said he had never felt pressure to manipulate the data under either president. Even if there were such pressure, he said, there is 'no way' the commissioner could interfere in the revisions process, which is conducted by career employees. Erica Groshen, who led the agency under President Barack Obama, called the decision 'a terrible precedent.' 'I hope will be reversed because it undermines the integrity of our statistical system and really all of government data and science,' she added, calling it 'a very sad day.' Dr. McEntarfer's tenure got off to a rough start last year when the agency made a series of missteps in which Wall Street firms had access to data before the general public. But none of those incidents involved issues with the statistics themselves. Mr. Trump and his top aides have made a habit of attacking government agencies, researchers and watchdogs when they have produced findings that the president does not like. That has led to concerns that Mr. Trump could seek to interfere with the operations of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and other statistical agencies, particularly if the economy begins to take a turn for the worse. Until now, however, most experts on the statistical system said they remained confident in the data produced by the agencies and had seen no evidence of political interference in their operations. Current and former agency staff members consistently echoed that message — in part, they said, because they trusted Dr. McEntarfer and her counterparts at the other major statistical agencies to protect their independence. 'If that pressure got too great, you would see people resigning rather than shape the numbers,' Mr. Beach said. Economists across the ideological spectrum said Mr. Trump's move to oust Dr. McEntarfer was likely to erode public confidence in the data published by the administration. 'If you want people to stop trusting the numbers coming out of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, firing the person who is confirmed by the Senate to make sure those numbers are trustworthy is a real good way to do it,' said Martha Gimbel, the executive director of the Budget Lab at Yale, who served in the White House under Mr. Biden. Dr. McEntarfer could not immediately be reached for comment. On Friday morning, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released data showing that employers added only 73,000 new jobs in July. It also notably revised data for the previous two months, reducing the number of jobs created by 258,000. While revisions to previous months are common, it was an unusually high number that came as a surprise. It suggested the labor market was not as resilient as it had seemed earlier this summer. Shortly after the numbers were released, Stephen Miran, the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, offered an explanation for the jobs revision that was much different from Mr. Trump's. On CNBC, he said much of the change was the result of 'quirks in the seasonal adjustment process' and even the president's own policies, particularly on immigration, potentially affecting hiring numbers for May and June. He made no mention of any concerns about manipulated data as he sought to recast the slowdown in July as a 'pretty decent' jobs report. By evening, Kevin Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, sought to frame the firing as an attempt to restore 'trust' at the statistics agency. Unlike Mr. Trump, who described the revisions as politically motivated, Mr. Hassett said its jobs figures had been 'awful' for some time. 'I think it is a good time for a fresh set of eyes to look at what the heck is going on,' he told Fox Business. In his social media posts on Friday, Mr. Trump provided no evidence that Dr. McEntarfer had injected political bias into her agency's data. And his criticisms contained contradictions and inaccuracies. Mr. Trump complained about not just the latest jobs numbers but also a set of revisions from last year. The bureau, like other statistical agencies, routinely updates its figures to incorporate data that wasn't initially available or to reflect information from more authoritative sources. Last August, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said employers had added roughly 818,000 fewer jobs over a 12-month period than previously believed. That announcement was part of a normal annual revision process, although the change was unusually large. (It was also preliminary — the final figures were revised down by just under 600,000 jobs.) In a social media post on Friday, Mr. Trump said the revision was made 'right after the election.' In fact, the announcement was made roughly two and a half months before Election Day. Indeed, Mr. Trump posted about the revisions at the time, calling them a 'MASSIVE SCANDAL.' To the agency's defenders, however, the twin revisions show that it operates without political bias and was willing to announce politically inconvenient news under presidents of both parties. 'President Trump is completely wrong in asserting there's been any sort of anti-Trump bias in the labor market data,' said Michael Strain, an economist at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. 'I think that assertion is wholly unsupported.' Mr. Strain said that government data is revised frequently, and that doing so reflected a 'standard' practice to ensure its quality. In this case, he acknowledged that the change was 'historically large' but 'doesn't smell fishy.' Federal statistical agencies have faced mounting challenges in recent years as Americans have become more reluctant to respond to the surveys that are the basis for much of the nation's economic data. Shrinking budgets have made it harder to make up for falling response rates, and to develop new approaches to replace surveys altogether. Those concerns predate the current administration, but have grown worse since Mr. Trump returned to office. The statistical agencies have struggled with staff attrition as a result of the president's freeze on federal hiring, combined with the buyouts he offered early in his term. The president's budget also proposed further staff and funding cuts. In June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said it was reducing its collection of data on consumer prices in response to resource constraints. Economists warned that, over time, such cuts could erode the reliability of the inflation data that Federal Reserve policymakers rely on when setting interest rates, and that determine cost-of-living increases in union contracts and Social Security benefits, among other uses. Asked about those cuts on Wednesday, Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, said policymakers were 'getting the data that we need to do our jobs.' But he stressed the importance of the federal statistical agencies. 'The government data is really the gold standard in data,' he said. 'We need it to be good and to be able to rely on it.' Sydney Ember contributed reporting.
CNN
36 minutes ago
- CNN
Trump fires a senior official over jobs numbers
Donald Trump Job market EconomyFacebookTweetLink Follow President Donald Trump has fired Dr. Erika McEntarfer, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, whom he accused, without evidence, of manipulating the monthly jobs reports for 'political purposes.' The BLS' monthly labor report Friday showed that the US economy added only 73,000 jobs in July, far below expectations. It also sharply revised down the employment growth that had been previously reported in May and June – by a combined 258,000 jobs. After the revisions, the jobs report showed the weakest pace of hiring for any three-month period since the pandemic recession in 2020. 'In my opinion, today's Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad,' Trump said in a Truth Social post. Although the May and June jobs numbers were worse than initially believed, revisions are normal in this process. The BLS' initial monthly jobs estimates are often based on incomplete data, so they are revised twice after the initial report — followed by an annual revision every February. Additionally, BLS economists use a formula to smooth out jobs numbers for seasonal variations and that can exacerbate revisions when they fall outside economists' expectations. Trump on Friday incorrectly called the revisions a 'mistake.' 'McEntarfer said there were only 73,000 Jobs added (a shock!) but, more importantly, that a major mistake was made by them, 258,000 Jobs downward, in the prior two months,' Trump said on Truth Social. 'Similar things happened in the first part of the year, always to the negative. The Economy is BOOMING under 'TRUMP.'' Trump said McEntarfer 'faked' the jobs numbers before the election to try to boost former Vice President Kamala Harris' chances in the 2024 presidential election. 'We're doing so well. I believe the numbers were phony, just like they were before the election, and there were other times. So, you know what I did? I fired her, and you know what? I did the right thing,' Trump told reporters Friday on the South Lawn. McEntarfer was confirmed by the Senate 86-8 in January 2024 for a term of four years. CNN has reached out to McEntarfer for comment. Until Trump replaces McEntarfer, Deputy Commissioner William Wiatrowski will serve as Acting Commissioner, the administration said. Trump has previously criticized the BLS for its jobs data and revisions, and he told reporters Friday evening he's 'always had a problem with these numbers.' In 2016, during his first presidential campaign, Trump claimed that the unemployment rate was significantly higher than the BLS let on. In 2024, he accused former President Joe Biden's administration of orchestrating a cover-up, after the BLS reported that it had overcounted jobs by 818,000 over the previous 12 months. 'I was thinking about it this morning, before the numbers that came out. I said, 'Who is the person that does these numbers?' And then they gave me stats about before the election,' Trump said Friday. 'We need people that we can trust,' he added. But Trump and his administration have also praised the BLS data when it has been favorable to them. During Trump's first term, former White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said in March 2017 that the jobs data was no longer 'phony' after the BLS issued a strong jobs report. And a month ago, current White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt posted on social media that the economy had beat expectations for jobs in four straight BLS labor reports. The BLS is nonpartisan, and businesses and government officials rely on the accuracy of its data to make determinations about investment, hiring, spending and all sorts of key decisions. 'It's outrageous for anyone in government to question the integrity of the BLS,' said Jason Furman, a Harvard professor and former Obama economic adviser. 'Accurate statistics are essential to the economy.' Furman doubted that replacing McEntarfer would compromise the BLS, but he said even the possibility or appearance of that notion 'would be bad.' 'Countries that have tried to fake those statistics have often ended up with economic crises as a result,' Furman said. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, said the BLS' data is at the 'highest standard,' and 'as accurate as it can be.' 'Anything that undermines that or even the perception of that high standard is deeply worrisome,' Zandi said. 'I've never seen anything even close to this.' At Moody's, Zandi said he has hired a number of former BLS economists whom he called 'fantastic.' 'They do great work,' Zandi said. 'They are critical to a well-functioning economy.' Democratic Virginia Senator Mark Warner accused Trump of working the referees. 'Firing the ump doesn't change the score,' Warner said in a statement. 'Americans deserve to know the truth about the state of the Trump economy.' But Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer said in a post on social media that she supports replacing McEntarfer. 'A recent string of major revisions have come to light and raised concerns about decisions being made by the Biden-appointed Labor Commissioner,' Chavez-DeRemer said on X. 'I support the President's decision to replace Biden's Commissioner and ensure the American People can trust the important and influential data coming from BLS.' The BLS jobs survey is widely considered by economists to be robust. It samples more than 100,000 businesses and government agencies each month, representing roughly 629,000 individual worksites. But, as part of larger cost-cutting taking place around practically every part of Trump's government, the BLS is laying off staff — and, as a result, reducing the scope of its work. For example, the BLS posted a notice in June stating it stopped collecting data for its Consumer Price Index in three cities (Lincoln, Nebraska; Buffalo, New York; and Provo, Utah) and increased 'imputations' for certain items (a statistical technique that, when boiled down to very rough terms, essentially means more educated guesses). That worried Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. In testimony before Congress in June, Powell said he believed the BLS data to be accurate, but he was upset about what could become a trend. 'I wouldn't say that I'm concerned about the data today, although there has been a very mild degradation of the scope of the surveys,' Powell said at the time, in response to a question about survey data quality. 'But I would say the direction of travel is something I'm concerned about.' This story has been updated with additional developments and context.
