251–260 of 524 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same question. It seems like they have had fast track rules for a pretty long time and will include SpaceX https://www.msci.com/indexes/markets-in-motion/megacap-ipos
So the funds will have to buy within 10 days of the IPO. But I assume at least it's based on the free-float market cap?
I'm quite relieved as the S&P should be stable and slow. But with that caveat said, is this why the S&P 500 dropped off a cliff on Friday? If so, why?
It dropped because tech dropped and it still has a lot of tech.
This is why QQQ was down far more than SPY, as QQQ is more tech heavy and will be adding these companies.
Stocks and money. It's so boring. I will go drive my old German car now, and get a bit drunk in a bottle of Nebbiolo while listening to some French lunatic with a piano. Enjoy your trip to Mars and your self driving toy cars. The world is off its rails. Bit time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, it might be a good decision but I think the possibility of Standard and Poor one day being worth trillions of dollars more than if they had included three companies a year or two earlier than when they inevitably join the index is absolutely zero.
> ... Standard and Poor one day being worth trillions ... S&P - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%26P_Global - is a business intel & analytics firm, not an investment firm. Their S&P 500 list just one of many datasets that they manage and sell. Cleverly trying to pick future winners and losers has little potential upside for them, and could put them into direct competition with many of their customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN discussion quality has deteriorated dramatically, especially for anything AI related.
One of my indices of mania. You saw similar comments for crypto, blockchain, NFT, VR.
I'm quite relieved as the S&P should be stable and slow. But with that caveat said, is this why the S&P 500 dropped off a cliff on Friday? If so, why?
Strong job numbers + increasing inflation = overheated economy = goodbye interest rate cuts. In fact, there's a significant chance that rates will go up this year. Perhaps even more than once.
That means cost of borrowing will increase, which is bad for business growth.
I'm quite relieved as the S&P should be stable and slow. But with that caveat said, is this why the S&P 500 dropped off a cliff on Friday? If so, why?
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/markets/tech-stocks-sink-rc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It becomes moot if even some of the companies crash. If you try to say it works if some of them crash because some of them didn't you actually get that XKCD "Nobody has won the US Presidential Election without..." silliness. "OK, the rule should be you have to be profitable OR have an HQ in a city with two vowels in its name". Did it really used to require that you own "15 railroads" ?
The commenter is likely referring to the original S&P 90, which mandated a certain number of stocks in different sectors. At the time those numbers were 50 industrials, 20 utilities, and 15 railroads. The breakdown shifted as the economy changed until the 80's when they did away with sector quotas in favor of rules closer to today (basing allocation on market cap). Regardless, the S&P 500 also excludes a company like…
If you have any doubts, I highly recommend to review the stock price history of GPRO(GoPro), BYND (Beyond Meat), CGC (Canopy Growth), TLRY (Tilray). These are just some somewhat recent IPOs that come to mind, I am sure I am forgetting some. In the case of GPRO, look up their first quarterly reports after the IPO. Pure comedy gold.
This comparison is nuts and invalid. Each of Anthropic/OpenAI/SpaceX has more revenue than the mentioned companies combined at IPO time. Doomers gonna doom