| ▲ | The 'S&P 493' reveals a different U.S. economy(msn.com) |
| 76 points by MilnerRoute 5 hours ago | 24 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | arjie 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I remember reading this headline and then going and looking at the XMAG index[0]. YTD: +15.5% 1 year: +9% Since inception (Oct 2024): +14% Comparing that with S&P500 YTD: +16.7% 1 year: +13% Since XMAG inception: +18% The article should start with such a comparison but it just seems like a lot of text with very little numerical comparison, which makes it not very useful to conclude what the case is. 0: https://www.defianceetfs.com/xmag/ |
| |
| ▲ | omnicognate 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The MSN link on the post doesn't have the charts the original WaPo article [0] contains, which provide just such a comparison, though over a longer period (from 2019), showing 132% vs 1057%. (No idea if that is right or more/less meaningful, just pointing out it's missed off this link.) [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/11/24/sp500-sto... | | | |
| ▲ | edoceo 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Correct! Backtest and compare ratios to common indexes! | |
| ▲ | anovikov 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If we made a similar comparison to the SP500 index since its inception in 1926, and made a chart of total returns difference over 1 year sliding window, between index and index minus it's top 7 performing stocks, i bet we will see this recent period isn't at all exceptional. Every economic boom is propelled by one or two sectors that have a limited number of players. |
|
|
| ▲ | nektro 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| real url https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/11/24/sp500-sto... |
| |
|
| ▲ | blue1 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So a viable strategy would be to only buy the best 7 stocks? Like the Dogs of the Dow, but reversed? (The Gods of the Dow?) |
| |
| ▲ | tybit 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah, investing in the top companies leads to higher returns for most periods when looking short term. Over longer periods, the top companies by market cap tend to change though.
https://www.investmentnews.com/equities/only-one-of-the-worl... So if you want to invest in the top companies, you either need to think they won’t change anymore, or you need to find when to buy and sell.
Index funds solve this problem for you, albeit with slightly lower returns in the short term. | |
| ▲ | Ekaros 17 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | It works until it doesn't. And it can stop working very fast. Which is the scary part. But then it also depends on entry point. If you entered early even going down say 40% or 60% might not make you go red. |
|
|
| ▲ | gblargg an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So if we look at companies that didn't do as well, we find that they didn't do as well as those that did really well? |
|
| ▲ | nairboon an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The stock market has been dominated by a single industry many times in history: railroads (Union Pacific), oil (Standard Oil, later Exxon), steel (U.S. Steel), banking (JPM), industrials (GE), telecom (ATT), computer hardware (IBM, MSFT, Intel), smartphones (Apple), consumer internet (Facebook, Google, Amazon) and now "AI" (Nvidia, Magnificent 7). Isn't the interesting question now: what follows? Or does history end with Mag7? |
| |
| ▲ | epolanski 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I think that the overall point is that gargantuan big tech capex is hiding an overall weakness in the economy. |
|
|
| ▲ | aeternum 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Different than when the railroads dominated the market, or the industrials dominance in the 20s and 30s, or the nifty fifty, or the communication dominance in the late 90s? Does the S&P 493 reveal a different economy or does it reveal that the author published an article based on feelings instead of research? |
| |
|
| ▲ | milleramp 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| All words, not one chart or graph. |
| |
|
| ▲ | jimbob45 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| In previous years, I could have excused such shoddy journalism. In the age of LLMs that can do the work for you, it’s inexcusable that the author didn’t pick 3-5 sample strong economies from the past to judge today by. |
| |
| ▲ | faidit 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Such as? (edit: to clarify, since you apparently downvoted me for asking [lmao], what exactly are these 3-5 alleged success stories for monopolism/crony capitalism that ChatGPT told you about?) | | |
| ▲ | sokoloff 24 minutes ago | parent [-] | | A user cannot downvote a comment that’s directly in reply to their own. It was likely other user(s) who downvoted a comment that they perceived as low-effort and adding little to the discussion, which I could easily see if the entire comment was something like “Such as?” | | |
| ▲ | faidit 4 minutes ago | parent [-] | | I see, thanks. FWIW I was succinct because I didn't think a comment to the effect of "I prefer to let AI do my thinking for me" merited a substantive response. I was (and still am) also genuinely curious what these 3-5 examples were. South Korean chaebols? Roman latifundia? Perhaps we'll never know |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | senordevnyc 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Why the fuck is TSLA ever included in this list? |
| |
