401ks and pension funds have large amounts of money in index funds.
Major indexes like VTI will buy SpaceX after a waiting period as long as it satisfies other rules (and there have been some rule changes in various indexes to make something with low float like SpaceX eligible for inclusion).
However, most indexes are float-adjusted, meaning that they will adjust the amount of shares of a company in the index based on their float, not their total shares. So, they will initially pick up small amount of weight/shares around the IPO.
The NASDAQ-100 has been bending over backwards to cater to SpaceX, which makes some sense because they want it listed on their exchange. They changed their inclusion rules to include a fast-track for IPOs. This type of mechanism isn't uncommon in other large indexes (VTI has had fast-track rules for a long time) but the timing does make it appear that they changed their rules for SpaceX.
Other providers have made changes to float requirements for inclusion.
The NASDAQ-100 (QQQ being the popular ETF tracking it) is also not float adjusted and, instead, has some capping rules for low-float securities. I haven't done any projections but it seems that NASDAQ-100/QQQ will pickup more shares than the float-adjusted indexes.
Eh. I think it’s fair if Apple doesn’t want to publish something on their app store.
I just wish they weren’t so obstinate about people installing from other sources without signing/notarization. I understand it from a security standpoint but it’s also nakedly self-serving.
I’m glad that they’re fine with signing in this case.
Fair points. The notarization-but-not-App-Store path was actually a workable middle ground in my case. Apple still gates security via notarization, but doesn't gatekeep the use case. The warnings users see when installing non-App-Store apps could be lighter without compromising security.
I believe it's the opposite :)
All major indices (S&P500, MSCI, FTSE...) use free-float adjustments. And recently also NASDAQ - they've changed to cap of 3x the value of free-floating shares.
Kinda underwhelming. I was hoping to see that they improved their memory bandwidth to move toward competing with the M5 Max. But this is more akin to the Strix Halo.
From what I'm reading it's probably the same chip that's used in the DGX Spark, the memory bandwidth at 300MB/s is equivalent to an M5 Pro, however you can't get an M5 Pro with 128GB of RAM. Apple pushes you to the biggest M5 Max chip, which at the 14 inch form factor, costs you $5099. You can get an ASUS GB10 machine with 2TB storage for $4000, so I guess the RTX Spark laptops will be more than that due to battery and screen, etc.
Perhaps the next generation of the spark will improve on the bandwidth and RAM size numbers. Yes it's a lot like a Strix Halo, but this has CUDA, which will be of interest to developers who want that.
I was looking for AMD AI Max+ 395 laptops recently, and the only ones I've found were 13 inch models, which seems odd from a heat dumping standpoint. I'm looking for 16 inches, I guess the 13 inch form factor would make it easy for commutes where you're taking it to dock to a large monitor at work or home, but no 14 inch screens?
I've tried the Z13 Flow and I actually like the form factor except for the folio keyboard. I especially like that, since it's a tablet, it vents hot air out the top instead of into your lap/table. But the whole driver situation was very weird and things would randomly stop working. That may have improved since I tried one ~1 year ago.
Isn't there a possibility they were killed because the M5 Ultra is coming why waste memory on a M3 series Ultra or any other high memory Mac Studio computer when the next generation is coming within six months?
Possible, to be sure. But given that you could still buy the cheesegrater Mac Pro (with RAM and disk at 2019 prices, and a 2019 CPU at 2019 prices) right up to the week that the the M2 Ultra Mac Pro was announced, that would be something new. Not exactly an apples-to-apples comparison, to be sure, but still.
This has been a thing in the CRSP indexes (ie. the benchmark for Vanguard’s VTI) forever. As long as it meets float and cap requirements, it’s inserted into the indexes five days after trading begins.
It makes sense. They intend to track the market as it is.
Though, you can definitely make the case that the popularization of index funds has allowed their holders to essentially become patsies to hype IPOs.
Even with the CRSP indexes this was recently changed to make fast-tracking for these IPOs easier.[0]
> CRSP indexes were also recently changed to better accommodate fast entry . . . Previously, these screens included having at least 10% of shares qualifying as freely tradeable (known as float shares outstanding, or FSO). However, in April the methodology changed to allow stocks with either 10% FSO or approximately $3.3 billion in float-adjusted market capitalization to be eligible for index inclusion.
That change is notable because both Anthropic and SpaceX are planning to IPO at well under that old 10% requirement.[1] Neither would have qualified for fast-track inclusion before, but both are virtually guaranteed to clear the absolute valuation bar.
The person I was responding to was speaking to the fast-track concept, which has been a thing in CRSP indexes for a quite a while.
The float requirement changes are directly due to these huge IPOs only placing small amounts of float on the market. Their goal seems to be tracking the market and making this change prevents them from excluding two notable companies from their indexes.
IIRC CRSP indexes are float-weighted so they aren't going to attempt buying a ton of these IPOs anyway due to that low float.
Again. Would I have made the change? No because placing that little float on the market isn't kosher IMO.
These IPOs will have minuscule impact on the indexes initially. They will have a big impact if they can maintain share price in the first ranking/reconstitution after the lockup period expires.
They will have a big impact if they can maintain share price AND the float increases due to the lockout period expiring (ie. pre-IPO owners selling off shares).
I'd like to know how the CRSP/Morningstar folks feel about the interesting lock-up period rules that Elon has inserted into the SpaceX IPO and how that jives with their analysis.
Won't the lockup expiry increase the float on these already-included companies, forcing mechanical buying by all the very large pool pool of folks holding these index funds? Thus creating forced buyers to maintain said share price?
Every single index fund is different. They all have publicly available methodology guides; you can read them to understand how it works and to model various scenarios.
This particular one, the CRSP total market - which Vanguard uses for VTI - has a “modern” methodology that is thought to be very good. Once every three months they re-rank the entire market and assign weights based on the market as of a particular point in time. Then, a randomly-chosen number of days later, the fund (Vanguard) begins a weeklong reconstitution process in which they buy and sell stocks to reflect the new weights. It is intentionally a weeklong process so that the market is setting prices and not Vanguard with the size of their orders.
The lockup expiry happens, the market reacts, the market is re-weighted, the index reconstitutes. In that order. The price of the stock has to survive the increased float to force the index fund to buy lots more shares.
> This has been a thing in the CRSP indexes (ie. the benchmark for Vanguard’s VTI) forever.
CRSP has recently changed their rules:
> CRSP indexes were also recently changed to better accommodate fast entry. New IPOs are eligible for CRSP's suite of indexes after five trading days, provided they pass the index's eligibility and investability screens. Previously, these screens included having at least 10% of shares qualifying as freely tradeable (known as float shares outstanding, or FSO). However, in April the methodology changed to allow stocks with either 10% FSO or approximately $3.3 billion in float-adjusted market capitalization to be eligible for index inclusion. The weighting of stocks in CRSP indexes is also based on free float, which should help address the investability challenges associated with thinly traded stocks.
It's been a decade since I was in college but I used to send applications to every vaguely interesting internship, expecting less than 20% of them to contact me.
My university required an internship for graduation so you had to cast a wide net unless you wanted to wait to graduate.
Given how high-profile is and the number of students in the US, 1000 doesn't seem all that impressive.
401ks and pension funds have large amounts of money in index funds.
Major indexes like VTI will buy SpaceX after a waiting period as long as it satisfies other rules (and there have been some rule changes in various indexes to make something with low float like SpaceX eligible for inclusion).
However, most indexes are float-adjusted, meaning that they will adjust the amount of shares of a company in the index based on their float, not their total shares. So, they will initially pick up small amount of weight/shares around the IPO.
The NASDAQ-100 has been bending over backwards to cater to SpaceX, which makes some sense because they want it listed on their exchange. They changed their inclusion rules to include a fast-track for IPOs. This type of mechanism isn't uncommon in other large indexes (VTI has had fast-track rules for a long time) but the timing does make it appear that they changed their rules for SpaceX.
Other providers have made changes to float requirements for inclusion.
The NASDAQ-100 (QQQ being the popular ETF tracking it) is also not float adjusted and, instead, has some capping rules for low-float securities. I haven't done any projections but it seems that NASDAQ-100/QQQ will pickup more shares than the float-adjusted indexes.
reply