The Great Education Shake-Up: The Stocks That Stand to Win (and Lose) as Washington Dismantles the Department of Education

This article is sponsored by Career Angel.ai!

The Great Education Shake-Up: The Stocks That Stand to Win (and Lose) as Washington Dismantles the Department of Education

The Department of Education (ED) is being hollowed out in real time. Not abolished—yet—but peeled apart like a federal onion and distributed across other agencies. Oversight of K-12 and higher-ed programs is shifting to the Department of Labor. Grants are being moved to Health and Human Services. International programs are being shuffled to the State Department. Oversight of Indigenous education is heading to Interior. And the fate of the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio—one of the largest consumer credit assets on Earth—is now up in the air.

Politically? This is chaos.
For markets? This is opportunity.

When Washington rewires a federal department responsible for student lending, grant distribution, civil rights enforcement, K-12 accountability, and higher-ed policy, the ripple effects hit multiple publicly traded industries—loan servicers, lenders, education companies, EdTech, REITs, and even workforce-skills providers.

This is the definitive MacroHint breakdown of who benefits, who gets hurt, and why the next 3–5 years could be the most profitable shake-up in education finance since Congress created the Direct Loan program in 2010.

Let’s dig in.

1. What’s Actually Happening in Washington — and Why It Matters for Investors

Before we talk winners and losers, we need to be clear-eyed about the policy landscape.

The Trump administration has signed interagency agreements shifting entire program offices out of the Department of Education:

Labor Department: K-12 and higher-ed oversight
HHS: grants for parenting college students, foreign medical accreditation
State Department: international education and foreign language programs
Interior: Indigenous education programs

Meanwhile, ED has already laid off 1,400 employees, is considering restructuring its Office for Civil Rights, and has openly considered spinning off or relocating its student loan operations.

Add to that the proposed One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA)—which:

Eliminates Grad PLUS loans
Caps Parent PLUS loans
Consolidates repayment into a single new Repayment Assistance Plan
Rewrites the eligibility and origination structure for federal student loans

And you end up with the biggest structural overhaul to American education finance in a generation.

Markets care about three big questions:

Who handles the $1.6 trillion federal student loan portfolio next?
Who gains market share if federal loan programs shrink or change shape?
Which education companies thrive in a world where the federal footprint shrinks and the Labor Department pushes “workforce-first” policy?

Let’s break this into investing categories.

2. Category A: The Biggest Potential Winners — Student Loan Servicers and Private Lenders

If Washington decentralizes student loan management—or sells off chunks of the loan book—private sector servicers and lenders stand to gain massively.

Nelnet (NNI) — The Purest Upside Play in the Entire Restructuring

Nelnet is already one of the largest federal loan servicers in the U.S.
They handle millions of borrower accounts, manage payment systems, and operate the infrastructure the government relies on.

Nelnet has three competitive advantages:

1. Scale — They’re one of the only companies capable of handling tens of millions of loan accounts.
2. Infrastructure — Their servicing platform already supports the Direct Loan program.
3. Optionality — If the federal loan portfolio is sold, split, or outsourced further, Nelnet is first in line.

This is the closest thing to a “pick-and-shovel” trade” in the education-restructuring theme.

Navient (NAVI) — The High-Risk, High-Reward Player

Navient is a more volatile version of Nelnet.
Their balance sheet holds legacy FFELP loans and private student loans, and they’ve historically battled litigation and political pressure.

But if the Biden-era regulatory hostility fully evaporates and Washington pushes more lending into private channels, Navient’s addressable market expands dramatically.

If the Department of Education steps back, Navient steps in.

SoFi (SOFI) — The Silicon Valley Beneficiary of Washington’s Retreat

SoFi is not a pure student loan stock, but it thrives when:

Borrowers lose generous federal loan options
Refinancing demand spikes
Private alternatives look more attractive

If federal lending becomes tighter, capped, or less subsidized, SoFi’s UI-driven, low-friction refinancing engine becomes the default escape valve for millions of borrowers.

SoFi won’t get government contracts.
But it will get borrowers fleeing a new federal landscape.

The “Surge Scenario”

In the event Congress or the administration decides to:

Privatize segments of the loan book
Outsource repayment systems
Consolidate servicing under fewer vendors
Offload risk from federal balance sheets

These three names—NNI, NAVI, SOFI—become the core beneficiaries.

3. Category B: Companies That Benefit from a Shift to Workforce Training

When the Department of Labor takes responsibility for K-12 and higher-ed oversight, the policy orientation shifts from:

“How do we fund traditional degrees?”
to
“How do we produce job-ready workers?”

This is a tectonic shift.

It benefits companies already positioned around:

Healthcare shortages
Blue-collar training
Adult learners
Flexible, job-aligned programs

Let’s talk names.

Adtalem Global Education (ATGE) — The Healthcare Powerhouse

Adtalem is the most direct beneficiary of a workforce-centric education structure.

Why?

Because healthcare is the largest labor shortage in America—and Labor/HHS now hold the purse strings.

Adtalem’s brands:

Chamberlain University (largest U.S. nursing school)
Ross University School of Medicine
American University of the Caribbean

Enrollment is rising, revenue exceeds $1.8 billion, and healthcare education is politically bulletproof.

Under a Labor-managed system, nursing and medical training are the exact programs Washington wants more of, not fewer.

Strategic Education (STRA) — The Flexible Adult-Learner Model

Strayer and Capella specialize in:

Adults trying to finish degrees
Employers partnering for tuition benefits
Job-focused online programs

STRA has always been a “workforce university” before the term went mainstream.
In a world where federal education oversight becomes more decentralized and employer-aligned, STRA’s model becomes a competitive advantage.

Perdoceo (PRDO) — The Career-Skills Operator

Not every for-profit school benefits from the restructuring.
But Perdoceo’s brands (Colorado Technical University, American InterContinental University) focus on:

IT
Cybersecurity
Engineering tech
Business operations

These are the “Labor Department degree equivalents”—aligned to practical workforce needs.

4. Category C: EdTech and Alternative Credentialing — The Long-Duration Beneficiaries

This is where things get interesting.

If the Department of Education’s role shrinks, and federal borrowing becomes capped or constrained, marginal students rethink the cost-benefit equation of traditional degrees.

That pushes consumer demand toward:

Shorter programs
Skills-based training
Modular credentials
Low-cost digital platforms

Here are the public-market beneficiaries.

Coursera (COUR)

Coursera’s worldwide enrollment exceeds 100 million learners.
Its enterprise business is growing because employers now treat Coursera certificates as workforce training.

If traditional higher-ed faces funding turbulence, Coursera’s low-cost model looks increasingly attractive to both students and employers.

Udemy (UDMY)

Udemy is the “skills microdose” platform.
Companies buy Udemy Business for coding, cloud, cybersecurity, and data analytics training.

Employer-paid training increases when federal spending on traditional education becomes uncertain.

Duolingo (DUOL)

Duolingo is not about degrees—it’s about learning migration.
As Washington destabilizes the federal education pipeline, the most resilient companies will be those offering:

Direct-to-consumer education
Independent learning
Global credentialing

Duolingo is already growing faster than most EdTech names and has brand power no traditional education company can match.

5. Category D: Who Doesn’t Benefit — or Worse, Who Gets Hurt

Not every education company enjoys a Washington shake-up.

Here are the clearest non-beneficiaries.

1. Traditional universities dependent on PLUS loans

OBBBA restructures the federal loan system:

Eliminates Grad PLUS loans
Caps Parent PLUS loans
Reduces ability of institutions to rely on unlimited federal borrowing

Graduate programs—especially expensive professional master’s degrees—depend heavily on Grad PLUS.

Without unlimited federal lending, many second- and third-tier graduate programs face enrollment pressure.

This affects:

MBA programs
Law schools
Education degrees
Certain medical/healthcare programs (outside of elite med schools)

While universities aren’t publicly traded, the ecosystem around them is.

This leads to the next category.

2. Student-housing REITs exposed to fragile campuses

If enrollment in marginal graduate programs shrinks, student housing operators around non-flagship campuses face:

Higher vacancy risk
Lower rent growth
Reduced expansion opportunities

The elite schools will be fine.
The regional campuses dependent on high-debt grad students won’t.

This creates subtle—but real—downside for publicly traded student housing REITs heavily weighted toward non-elite institutions.

3. For-profits lacking a workforce narrative

Not all for-profit schools win.

The ones that don’t align with:

Labor shortages
Employer needs
Healthcare training
Adult reskilling

…may see:

Lower federal borrowing capacity
Stricter oversight
Enrollment declines
Higher dropout risks
Lower operating margins

This is why ATGE/STRA are likely winners, but generic Title IV-dependent for-profits without strong outcomes are structural losers.

4. Incumbent federal contractors if the transition is messy

The irony:
Nelnet and Navient are both beneficiaries AND risk exposures.

If the transition is chaotic—new contracts, rushed migrations, political pressure—they may face:

Loss of servicing contracts to political favorites
Fines or penalties for transition errors
Lower servicing fees
Structural uncertainty

The upside case is huge.
The downside case is also real.

6. The Investor Playbook — How to Build a Portfolio Around the Education Restructuring

Tier 1: Direct leverage to federal student loan restructuring

NNI
NAVI
SOFI
Potentially: banks that buy federally originated loans via auctions

These names benefit the fastest if ED’s workload transfers or if loan servicing privatizes.

Tier 2: Workforce-first education winners

ATGE
STRA
PRDO

These names benefit from a Labor Department-centric policy structure.

Tier 3: EdTech and alternative credentialing

COUR
UDMY
DUOL

These benefit from long-term shifts in student and employer behavior.

Tier 4: Avoid or underweight

Student-housing REITs tied to non-elite campuses
For-profit schools dependent on federal aid without strong outcomes
Traditional universities without strong market niches (not publicly traded, but affects adjacent sectors)

7. The Big Picture: Why This Is One of the Most Tradable Policy Shifts of the Decade

There are only a few times each generation when Washington’s decisions directly reshape:

A trillion-dollar federal portfolio
A multi-hundred-billion-dollar lending market
A century-old higher-ed model
The federal bureaucracy itself

This dismantling of the Department of Education—partial, incremental, chaotic, but real—creates a market environment in which capital reallocates, borrowing changes, and education finance gets rerouted through new channels.

This is not ideological.
It is structural.

And structural changes create winners and losers.

The winners will be those aligned with:

Workforce needs
Private lending
Scalable servicing
Digital learning
Employer partnerships

The losers will be those reliant on:

Unlimited federal borrowing
Traditional degrees with weak outcomes
Fragile campus ecosystems
Regulatory siloing inside ED

The investment opportunities aren’t speculative—they’re logical.

This is one of the rare macro shifts where political volatility creates investment clarity.

The dismantling of the Department of Education is not just a headline.

It’s a reallocation of power, capital, and opportunity across the education economy.

Smart investors will follow it.

DISCLAIMER: This analysis of the aforementioned stock security is in no way to be construed, understood, or seen as formal, professional, or any other form of investment advice. We are simply expressing our opinions regarding a publicly traded entity.

MACROHINT

MACROHINT

The Great Education Shake-Up: The Stocks That Stand to Win (and Lose) as Washington Dismantles the Department of Education