Which credit card rewards are better: Cash back or points?
Cash-back credit cards tend to be easier to use due to straightforward rewards programs with simple earning and redemption rates. However, you might prefer a travel rewards card for its redemption options, such as flights and hotel stays. Many travel credit cards also have increased perks and benefits, including travel insurance or airport lounge access.
The best credit card rewards aren't a matter of cash-back vs. points — what you earn largely comes down to your spending habits, lifestyle, and personal preference.
Cash-back credit cards are rewards cards that earn cash back on eligible purchases. For example, a cash-back card with a 2% rewards rate will earn 2% back on your purchases. That might seem small, but it can add up over time.
The average American household spent over $20,000 on food and transportation in 2022, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. If you spent $20,000 in a year on a 2% cash-back card, you would earn $400 in cash-back rewards.
It depends on the card and credit card company, but standard cash-back redemption options include:
Statement credits
Deposits into bank accounts
Covering past purchases
Mailed checks
Gift cards
Some cards, such as the Chase Freedom Unlimited®, include travel bookings as a redemption option. That means you can use cash-back rewards for travel-related redemptions, like flights and hotel stays.
Cash rewards: You can earn valuable cash back for making eligible purchases with your cash-back card. In addition, cash-back rewards programs are often easier to use and understand than travel rewards programs.
Welcome bonuses: It's common for cash-back cards to provide a welcome offer or sign-up bonus to new cardholders. You typically have to meet a spending requirement to earn the bonus.
Low annual fees: Many cash-back cards have low (under $100) or no annual fees, keeping your yearly card membership costs down.
0% intro APR offers: Cash-back cards have some of the best 0% intro APR offers on purchases and balance transfers.
Foreign transaction fees: Most cash-back cards charge foreign transaction fees, making them poor choices for international travel.
Limited redemptions: Travel redemption options are more uncommon on cash-back cards.
Fewer perks and benefits: You typically won't find as robust travel benefits on cash-back cards, including travel insurance, airport lounge access, and annual travel credits.
We recommend cash-back credit cards if you prefer earning cash rewards on your purchases, want a low annual fee, and want to take advantage of a 0% intro APR offer.
These cards aren't great for frequent travelers because of foreign transaction fees and limited travel redemption options.
This embedded content is not available in your region.
Why we like it: The Capital One Savor is an excellent card for earning cash back in many everyday categories, including grocery stores, dining, and entertainment. If your typical spending habits align with these categories, this could be the perfect addition to your wallet.
Read our full Capital One Savor Cash Rewards review
Why we like it: If you want a simple cash-back card, look no further than the Citi Double Cash. This card has a straightforward rewards rate that works on all eligible purchases. It could be all you need if you don't want to juggle multiple cards.
Read our full Citi Double Cash review
Why we like it: The Amex Blue Cash Everyday makes sense if you want a simple cash-back card for everyday shopping. We especially like that online shoppers can earn elevated rewards on Amazon.com, Walmart.com, and other online retailers.
Read our full Amex Blue Cash Everyday review
Points and miles credit cards earn travel rewards on eligible purchases. These cards often provide various redemption options, but their rewards are designed for travel bookings, such as flights and hotel stays.
Travel rewards vary by card and credit card issuer, which can be confusing for travel card beginners. For example, 10,000 points on one card might offer a different value than 10,000 points on another.
However, it's easy to determine the value of your rewards if you have a specific redemption in mind. Suppose you want to book a flight that costs $150 or 10,000 miles. If you divide $150 by 10,000, you get 0.015.
That means your miles are worth 1.5 cents per mile for that specific redemption. Anything above one cent per mile could be considered decent value, though some rewards' standard value might already be higher than that.
Standard credit card points and miles redemption options include:
Travel bookings
Transfers to travel partners
Covering past travel purchases
Statement credits
Mailed checks
Gift cards
Note that the redemption value for available redemptions varies by credit card. However, a general rule of thumb is that you'll get the most value when redeeming points to book travel or transfer rewards to travel partners.
Travel rewards: If you're a frequent traveler, nothing beats earning valuable points or miles on your existing purchases. Turning gas station and grocery purchases into flights and hotel stays on your next trip is incredibly rewarding.
Welcome bonuses: Welcome offers on the best travel credit cards tend to be more significant than cash-back card bonuses.
Increased perks and benefits: The best rewards credit cards provide a wide range of benefits, including travel credits, airport lounge access, travel insurance, and more. It's also common for travel cards to waive foreign transaction fees.
More redemption variety: It's common for travel cards to have many of the same redemption options as cash-back cards, such as statement credits and gift cards. In addition, you can also have multiple travel-related redemptions.
No 0% intro APR offers: Most travel cards don't provide intro APR offers on purchases or balance transfers.
Potential for high annual fees: Premium and luxury travel cards have high annual fees, often exceeding $300 or more annually. You must determine if it's worth paying an annual fee to use a card's benefits and rewards.
More complicated rewards: Points and miles values vary depending on the rewards program and how you plan to use them. Learning can be confusing at first, but it can pay off with big savings on travel expenses.
We recommend points and miles credit cards if you want to earn travel rewards to help offset significant travel expenses, such as flights and hotels. You can use these cards to make everyday purchases and the rewards you earn can help fuel your next vacation.
In addition, travel credit cards are essential for international travel since most don't charge foreign transaction fees. They also provide travel insurance and luxury travel perks, such as airport lounge access.
Why we like it: The Wells Fargo Autograph provides an exceptionally high rewards rate for a card with a $0 annual fee. Even better, its spending categories align with many everyday expenses, including dining, gas, and transit. If you want a low-stress but rewarding travel card, the Wells Fargo Autograph could be the right choice for you.
Why we like it: The Capital One Venture Rewards makes a strong case for anyone who values simplicity. It doesn't have confusing bonus categories and earns an elevated rate on all eligible purchases. In addition, you get added perks like access to transfer partners and receiving up to a $120 credit for TSA PreCheck or Global Entry applications.
Read our full Capital One Venture Rewards review
Why we like it: The Chase Sapphire Preferred has been one of the most popular travel credit cards for years because of its low annual fee and top-notch travel benefits. That includes getting 25% more value when your points are redeemed for travel through the Chase Travel℠ portal. You can also transfer points to various travel partner loyalty programs, including Southwest Airlines Rapid Rewards, World of Hyatt, and Virgin Atlantic Flying Club.
Read our full Chase Sapphire Preferred review
With cash-back cards, you typically get exactly what the earning rate says. If a card earns 2% cash back on everything, that's what you'll get for making purchases. With points and miles, your rewards value might vary by redemption. For example, 10,000 points could equal $125 toward travel or $100 cash back.
Booking travel through Chase Travel℠ is one of the best ways to use your Chase Ultimate Rewards points with certain Chase cards. For example, 60,000 points on the Chase Sapphire Preferred are worth $750 toward travel redeemed through Chase Travel, whereas those points would only be worth $600 if redeemed for cash back.
Depending on the redemption, some credit card rewards are worth over $0.01 per point, offering more value than most cash-back cards. That's often the case when transferring points to travel partners with valuable rewards programs. For example, you can typically get more than $0.01 per point on redemptions you make with Air Canada, Southwest Airlines, and Virgin Atlantic.
This article was edited by Rebecca McCracken
Editorial Disclosure: The information in this article has not been reviewed or approved by any advertiser. All opinions belong solely to Yahoo Finance and are not those of any other entity. The details on financial products, including card rates and fees, are accurate as of the publish date. All products or services are presented without warranty. Check the bank's website for the most current information. This site doesn't include all currently available offers. Credit score alone does not guarantee or imply approval for any financial product.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alcon's Latest Breakthrough Surgical Technology, Unity VCS, receives Health Canada approval
Combined vitreoretinal-cataract system (VCS) is cleared for use in Canada New, proprietary technology is designed to deliver significant surgical and workflow efficiencies First innovation to be introduced from Alcon's cutting-edge Unity portfolio of surgical equipment TORONTO, July 08, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Alcon, the global leader in eye care dedicated to helping people see brilliantly, today announced that UNITY® Vitreoretinal Cataract System (VCS) has received Health Canada approval. This innovation is the first to be introduced from Alcon's highly anticipated Unity portfolio. "Today marks an important day for Canadian ophthalmologists as we introduce the next generation of equipment solutions in cataract and vitreoretinal surgery, and we are grateful to those who helped us reach this milestone," said Franck Leveiller, Head of Global R&D and Chief Scientific Officer, Alcon. "We have a long legacy of engaging our customers throughout the research and development process to design bold innovations in ophthalmology. This approval is a significant milestone in delivering meaningful impact for Canadian Eye Care Professionals and patients." Unity VCS is Alcon's most advanced vitreoretinal and cataract surgical innovations combined together in one integrated platform. Unity VCS is designed to deliver enhanced workflow efficiencies over Alcon's current leading systems, CONSTELLATION® Vision System for vitreoretinal and combined procedures, and CENTURION® Vision System with ACTIVE SENTRY® for cataract surgery. "The first time I used Unity VCS in a wet lab environment, I had a real 'wow' reaction," said Dr. Rosa Braga-Mele, ophthalmologist and chair of Alcon's North America Cataract Core Advisory Board. "This is a proud moment to see the world-class innovation from Alcon receive approval in Canada. I'm particularly excited about the stability of the fluidics and cutting efficiency of the platform, which is quite remarkable and will create considerable surgical efficiencies." Unity VCS leverages a novel phacoemulsification modality to deliver up to two times faster nucleus removal^ with 40% less energy* into the eye1, and a first-of-its-kind phaco handpiece that estimates temperature at the incision site3. In vitreoretinal advancements, the new technology offers cutting speeds of up to 30,000 cuts per minute, the world's fastest vitrectomy probe#,2,3. The platform offers surgical stability and efficiency with a unique proprietary fluidics system3. "As a global market leader in cataract and retina surgical products4,5,6, Alcon recognizes that the increasing demand for these procedures7,8,9 necessitates enhanced workflow efficiencies and excellent patient outcomes," said Jeroen Bastemeijer, General Manager, Alcon Canada. "Unity VCS builds on Alcon's expertise in surgical equipment with pioneering innovations for vitreoretinal and cataract surgery—driving advancements from cutting speeds to fluidics management, to ergonomics and workflow. We are thrilled to bring this latest breakthrough technology, Unity VCS, to Canadian clinics in 2026." Alcon has tested Unity VCS during investigational advisory wet lab sessions with more than 200 highly experienced surgeons from 30+ countries. Commercial launch of Unity VCS is expected in early 2026. Unity VCS is the latest innovation from the Alcon Vision Suite—a portfolio of innovative products designed to help Eye Care Professionals increase clinic and OR efficiency, and deliver exceptional patient experiences. The Alcon Vision Suite will continue to grow with cutting-edge Unity products that are expected to be introduced over the coming years, adding to our market-leading legacy products, which will continue to be available and serviceable. Unity VCS will be supported by Alcon's training, product maintenance, and Services teams. About AlconAlcon helps people see brilliantly. As the global leader in eye care with a heritage spanning over 75 years, we offer the broadest portfolio of products to enhance sight and improve people's lives. Our Surgical and Vision Care products touch the lives of more than 260 million people in over 140 countries each year living with conditions like cataracts, glaucoma, retinal diseases and refractive errors. Our more than 25,000 associates are enhancing the quality of life through innovative products, partnerships with Eye Care Professionals and programs that advance access to quality eye care. Learn more at About UNITY VCSIndications / Intended Use3: The UNITY® VCS (Vitreoretinal Cataract System) console, when used with compatible devices, is indicated for use during anterior segment (i.e. phacoemulsification and removal of cataracts) and posterior segment (i.e. vitreoretinal) ophthalmic surgery. In addition, with the optional laser, this system is indicated for photocoagulation (i.e. vitreoretinal and macular pathologies), iridotomy and trabeculoplasty procedures. Please refer to the Directions for Use for the accessories/consumables and User Manual for a complete listing of indications, warnings, cautions and notes. ^2x faster nucleus removal than OZIL Torsional phaco*Based on N=10 HPs, Artificial cataract lens IOP 55 mmHg vacuum of 450 mmHg#Compared to Constellation HYPERVIT 20k vitrectomy probeOZIL - Trademarks are the property of their respective owners. References Alcon Data on File, 2024 - REF-24379. Alcon Data on File, 2024 - REF-24644. Unity VCS User Manual 2024 – REF-24980. Market Scope 2023 Retinal Surgical Device Market Report, 2023. Market Scope 2023 Cataract Surgical Equipment Market Report, 2023. Market Scope 2024 IOL Market Report, 2024. CNIB – Blindness in Canada, Accessed December 2, 2024 - REF-19527. The Prevalence of Canadian Vision Loss and Cataract Surgery, 2019 - REF-01661. Conference Board of Canada - Ophthalmology in Canada: Why Vision Loss Should Not Be Overlooked, 2020 - REF-10834. Connect with us onFacebook LinkedIn View source version on Contacts Media Relations Jane Lee Cheung+1 289 290 2393 (Canada)
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Defense Spending Bill Boosts US Producers of Military Shoes and Gear
American producers are celebrating a win for domestic industry within a government defense spending bill that advanced this week. Language from the Better Outfitting Our Troops (BOOTS) Act was included in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 2026, which was voted through by the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) on Tuesday evening. It now faces a full vote in the House of Representatives. More from Sourcing Journal Designer Thom Solo Brings T1D Story to Lawmakers at Breakthrough Event Reintroduced Bill Would Shift CBP's Operational Costs Away from Ports Wrangler, Diesel Step Out With New Footwear Partnerships The inclusion will require the Secretary of Defense to issue regulations for the armed forces within the next two years that prevent servicemembers from purchasing optional combat boots as a part of their required uniforms that are made overseas. Instead, they'll be largely required to buy American-made boots with few exceptions. The NDAA's text also includes a provision would eliminate a loophole in the Berry Amendment that allows the American armed forces to purchase textile products from foreign makers under the threshold of $150,000. The National Council of Textile Organizations (NCTO), which represents the country's textile and apparel supply chain, has long supported the BOOTS Act and other measures that would give U.S. manufacturers greater access to government contracts and patronage, especially outfitting the military. 'We applaud the HASC for passing the FY 2026 NDAA and including provisions that would help boost domestic manufacturing, strengthen American economic competitiveness, and meet the mission-critical needs of our Armed Forces,' the group's president and CEO, Kim Glas, said following the vote. Glas praised the leadership of Congressman Don Davis (D-N.C.) and Congressman Pat Harrigan (R-N.C.), who spearheaded bipartisan efforts to amend the NDAA with measures that favor of onshore industries. The lawmakers have also led efforts to close the small-purchase exemption within the Berry Amendment that has allowed the military to purchase textiles made overseas—a loophole that Glas said 'has led to U.S. military purchases of foreign-made textile articles largely at the expense of American textile manufacturers who have potentially lost several million dollars per year in U.S. government sales.' 'Eliminating this exemption will lead to the military procurement of more American-made military textile products as well as oversight of Berry Amendment compliance,' she said. Currently, American producers create more than 8,000 products a year, including over $1.8 billion in uniforms and equipment, for the armed forces. Also lobbying strongly on behalf of the BOOTS Act is the U.S. Footwear Manufacturing Association (USFMA), which took to Washington with a coalition of members from across the country to encourage lawmakers to include the bill within the defense spending legislation. According to the trade group, the Army and other branches of the military have been able to skirt the Berry Amendment—which was designed to ensure that soldiers were outfitted with American-made products—due to the longstanding loophole. Over the years, personnel have instead turned to cheaper combat boots, often made in China. American makers have been vying for a true shot at the defense industry, USFMA said—because bolstering their capabilities in that realm will also allow them to grow and scale their commercial capabilities, strengthening the overall U.S. footwear supply chain. There are also national security risks to the country's current inability to fully outfit its own troops. The trade organization pointed to a recent war game conducted for the Defense Logistics Agency, which revealed that in a wartime situation, the domestic supply chain would need at least a year and a half to ramp up to a point where it could meet the military's needs for footwear and other gear. The group said in a statement Wednesday that it was pleased with the inclusion of the BOOTS Act in the NDAA, characterizing it as a pivotal and encouraging step toward ensuring that combat boots worn by servicemembers are American-made. USFMA will continue its advocacy in the Senate, where the NDAA faces final passage. Also included in the NDAA were surprise provisions related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), otherwise known as 'forever chemicals.' Used across sectors and product categories, the substances are often found in cookware, firefighting foams, food packaging and apparel and footwear for waterproofing and oil repellency. They've also been linked to numerous health conditions, including cancers. While the NDAA doesn't take on the presence of PFAS in military garments or shoes, it does mandate that the Pentagon create a strategy to speed up the cleanup of PFAS contamination at military and National Guard installations to protect servicemembers from the potential dangers. Under the provisions included in the spending bill, the Department of Defense will be required to publish a public-facing dashboard that spells out cleanup efforts and timelines. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rupert Murdoch should fight Trump's bogus lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal
Rupert Murdoch is arguably one of the people most responsible for President Donald Trump's ascension to the White House. And yet, at a time when major news outlets' corporate parents are settling Trump's bogus lawsuits and capitulating to regulatory threats by doling out multimillion-dollar payoffs, any freedom-loving American should be rooting for the Australian-born right-wing media mogul to stand up to the president's all-out assault on free speech. Trump is suing Murdoch, News Corp., Dow Jones & Co., The Wall Street Journal's publisher and two reporters who wrote a bombshell article last week about a 'bawdy' Trump-penned birthday note to the late billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Trump claims the letter is a 'fake,' and his lawyers in the suit accuse the Journal of 'glaring failures in journalistic ethics and standards of accurate reporting.' He wants the defendants to pay at least $20 billion. Trump posted to Truth Social on Friday: 'I look forward to getting Rupert Murdoch to testify in my lawsuit against him and his 'pile of garbage' newspaper, the WSJ. That will be an interesting experience!!!' The White House also booted the Journal from the press pool for an upcoming presidential visit to Scotland. It's not hard to see why Trump thinks this could work. Disney and Paramount, rather than take Trump to court and win (as many legal experts said they would), paid off settlements of $15 million and $16 million, respectively, to end Trump's legal attacks against ABC News and CBS News. Just as some white shoe law firms and universities sheepishly bent the knee when faced with the Trump administration's punitive threats, Disney and Paramount helped solidify a model of corporate cowardice. These companies demonstrated they'd rather just pay off the shakedown artist in the White House than stand up for their news operations or the First Amendment. A representative with Dow Jones, the Journal's parent company, said in a statement: 'We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit.' To be sure, that's what they all say at first. But there are reasons for hope that the 94-year-old Murdoch could show more spine than his competitors. Murdoch's Fox News and New York Post properties — for the most part — have been reliable MAGA cheerleaders in the decade since Trump's 2015 escalator ride announcing he was running for the Republican presidential nomination. But there have been cracks in their Trump devotion. The day after the Jan. 6 Capitol riots, the Post's editorial board put the blame on Trump. Murdoch, for his part, was so outraged at Trump's conduct that he wrote in an email to a Fox News executive that he wanted the network to 'make Trump a non person.' Obviously, once the Republican base made it clear that there was literally nothing Trump could do that would make it vote for another contender, Fox News once again got in line behind Trump during the 2024 election. But Murdoch seems to understand that The Wall Street Journal is a much different property from a cable news network and a shouty local tabloid. Murdoch never turned the Journal into a sensationalist, ideologically conservative outlet. Under his ownership, the Journal has maintained its well-deserved reputation for diligent, independent news reporting. And Murdoch knows there's a distinct value to that. Even the Journal's typically Trump-adoring editorial board has repeatedly decried Trump's shakedowns of media outlets' parent companies. A WSJ editorial from June beseeched Paramount to resist the 'threat of regulatory disapproval' and instead 'win the legal case, vindicate its CBS journalists and the First Amendment, and trust that the FCC has enough integrity to operate as something more than the President's personal protection racket.' If only Paramount shared the right-wing editorial board's ethical clarity on the matter. Oh, well. Trump's history of bogus, speech-chilling lawsuits is well-documented. He's been filing them for decades, even once boasting that he knew he'd lose the cases but persisted with them because he knew they would make his perceived enemies' lives 'miserable.' There are other reasons Murdoch should fight back against Trump's legal thuggery. A judge last week threw out Trump's nearly $50 million lawsuit against legendary journalist Bob Woodward, and as my colleague Steve Benen noted, 'When Trump sued CNN and demanded $475 million, the case was thrown out; when he sued The Washington Post, the case was thrown out; and when he sued The New York Times, seeking $100 million, the case was thrown out.' In a thread posted to X, attorney Andrew Fleischman noted some of the reasons Trump's lawsuit against Murdoch and the Journal is a complete mess. These include the fact that Trump's legal team filed the suit in Florida, which has an anti-SLAPP law to protect people menaced by such bogus suits. Fleischman also noted what he says is a procedural error by Trump's legal team that could lead to a dismissal and Trump's paying the Journal's legal fees. Fleischman's conclusion: 'This lawsuit is meant to punish a newspaper for fair reporting. Any lawyer who tells you it has merit is talking out his ass.' Murdoch's often factually challenged right-wing media empire has done incalculable damage to the American body politic — and continues to serve as a faithful echo chamber for MAGA rhetoric during Trump's reign of flagrant authoritarianism. But the nonagenarian billionaire has a chance to stand up to a bully whom he clearly has no great personal affection for, and he has the chance to at least do his part in blocking Trump's rampage on the First Amendment. This is a legacy-defining moment. If Murdoch stands up to Trump's cancel culture and his defamation suit lawfare — and vigorously defends The Wall Street Journal and its journalists — Murdoch can boast that, at least once, he did the right thing for America. This article was originally published on
