Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Russel indexes are used by very large funds, e.g. vanguard usually track russel
 help



Which Vanguard and at which weight?

the largest 2.3T is https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/VTI/ which tracks CSRP which fasttracked SPaceX

To be clear, while the CRSP fast tracked SpaceX’s admission to their total market index, that policy (which states that if a security's total market cap is larger than the breakpoint of the CRSP US Small Cap Index, it is can be added after 5 days of trading) has been in place for at least a decade. Unlike SpaceX’s admission to the Nasdaq, this did not represent a change in policy.


(FYI, CRSP doesn't exist anymore)

CRSP adjusted their methodology prior to SpaceX IPO being announced. It's part of a larger discussion about what the purpose of an index is and how people invest. Vanguard is not out to screw people's retirement up (quite the opposite really). Anyone is welcome to be part of the discussion, but it's hard to get anyone to take you seriously if you only come out of the woodwork when something "bad" is about to happen.


> (FYI, CRSP doesn't exist anymore)

it absolutely exists, but was renamed

> CRSP adjusted their methodology prior to SpaceX IPO being announced.

important part is when SpaceX ipo plans were decided, not announced to clueless public


How many marginal dollars from that went into SpaceX?

The index drama was mostly a creation of influencers.


so you saying you know exact number affected by index drama, and it is small? What is that?

> you saying you know exact number affected by index drama, and it is small? What is that?

I'm not doing it again for Anthropic. The finance/crypto influencers have clearly found a pitch that entertains.

For SpaceX, $5bn of U.S. funds and $9bn globally were "forced" to buy [1]. Out of $200bn total buying over the first three days [2] and like $45 trillion of index assets in America alone [3].

[1] https://www.pouyabehmaram.com/articles/spacex-forced-buying

[2] https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/18/5-wild-spacex-stats-from-the...

[3] https://www.ici.org/system/files/2026-04/2026-factbook-quick...


mechanical buying in your link is 17.5B for initial 555M shares. 9nb is some creative napkin math.

Now, since than, spacex float increased from 555M shares to 4.3B.


> mechanical buying in your link is 17.5B

No, that's the upper end of what it could possibly be. It's what would happen if every manager in the first days after the IPO immediately bought the share. Most indices don't work that way, they rebalance over time, in part to avoid this sort of crowding. (They also have latitude to accept and reject index specifics, e.g. around buying new issues.) Managing tracking error against transaction cost is the whole business of passive management.

Also, let's use $17bn in forced buying–globally–and $12bn domestically. That's just not enough to move anything. It's also a vanishing percentage of total index assets. You're again talking about 0.04% of index assets going to what remains a multi-trillion dollar asset.

> spacex float increased from 555M shares to 4.3B

How is this relevant to the argument?


> How is this relevant to the argument?

it multiplies your numbers by factor 8.

> That's just not enough to move anything. It's also a vanishing percentage of total index assets.

the question is that its bunch of dudes dipped into unqualified investors savings


> it multiplies your numbers by factor 8

How? Which index 8x'd its SpaceX weight because float went up?

> the question is that its bunch of dudes dipped into unqualified investors savings

Unqualified investors? What are you referring to?

There are people who really want this to be a massive scam. And sure, you could argue that like two idiots who didn't know how indices work got duped. But you can't argue it was massive, either in capital-markets scales or even within the scale of the IPO.

Instead what I've seen is a bunch of financial influencers blowing a curiosity out of proportion and then doubling down with misinformation while a bunch of people traded into and out of indices for no particular reason.


> But you can't argue it was massive, either in capital-markets scales or even within the scale of the IPO.

I argue, its up to you if you accept it.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: