Honestly these IPOs are likely to kill the market. Once the necessary disclosures are out, and the worse-case math people are assuming turns out to have been way more optimistic than the actual truth, the entire market is likely crashing since the money is so spread out. So far there has been zero good news from an investment perspective out of LLM centered companies outside of what are ultimately just complex financial engineered investments.
If they get into the S&P 500 at a $300B market cap that puts them at #30, just behind Coca-Cola. They'll make up about half a percent of the index and then will have a ready supply of price-insensitive buyers in the form of everybody who puts their retirement fund into an index fund on autopilot.
Well they'll hit the requirements for company size and country of domicile, but aren't yet at the other requirements, of profitability and a minimum of 12 months after an IPO so they have a chance of being added.
As to the size of the bump they'll get there isn't a single rule of thumb but larger cap companies tend to get a smaller bump, which you'd expect. I've seen models estimate a 2-5% bump for large companies and a 4-7% bump for mid level and 6-12% for "small" under $20 Billion dollar market cap companies.
SP500 is a capitalization* weighted index, hence it is very price sensitive.
Everybody who puts their retirement fund into an index fund are buying the index fund without relation to the index fund's price (aka price insensitive). But the index fund itself is buying shares based on each company's relative performance, hence the index fund is price sensitive. That is evidenced by companies falling out of the SP500 and even failing.
>The goal of float adjustment is to adjust each company’s total shares outstanding for long-term, strategic shareholders, whose holdings are not considered to be available to the market.
The S&P 500 is inversely price sensitive, as a capitalization-weighted index. Normally you want to buy low and sell high. An S&P500 index fund buys more of high-priced stocks and sells the low-priced ones, by definition. The highest market caps are the stocks with the highest prices (adjusted for number of shares outstanding, of course).
For most ordinary investors, this doesn't really matter, because you put your money into your retirement fund every month and you only take it out at retirement. But if you're looking at the short term, it absolutely matters. I've heard S&P 500 indexing referred to as a momentum investment strategy: it buys stocks whose prices are going up, on the theory that they will go up more in the future. And there's an element of a self-fulfilling prophecy to that, since if everybody else is investing in the index fund, they also will be buying those same stocks, which will cause them to go up even more in the future.
If you want something that buys shares based on each company's relative performance, you want a fundamental-weighted index. I've looked into that and I found a few revenue-weighted index funds, but couldn't find a single earnings-weighted index fund, which is what I actually want. Recommendations wanted; IMHO the S&P 500 is way overvalued on fundamentals and heavily exposed to certain fairly bubbly stocks (the Mag-7 alone make up 35% of your index fund, and one of them is my employer, and all of them employ heavily in my geographic area and are pushing up my home value), so I've been looking for a way to diversify into companies that actually have solid earnings.
While it is true that being added to the SP500 can lead to an increase in demand, and hence cause the index fund to pay more for the share, there are evidently opposing forces that modulate share prices for companies in the SP500.
>I've been looking for a way to diversify into companies that actually have solid earnings.
No one has more solid earnings than the top tech companies. Assuming you don't work for Tesla, you already are doing about the best you can in the US. Your options to diversify is to invest in other countries, develop your political connections, and possibly get into real estate development. Maybe have a bunch of kids.
> The sum of the most recent four consecutive quarters’ Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) earnings (net income excluding discontinued operations) should be positive as should the most recent quarter.
Along with the Xbox app and eye tracking software that took forever to get rid of (with many-many steps--that still got reinstalled with subsequent updates) out of my "Professional" Windows installation, having co-pilot embedded in every screen finally convinced me to switch to Linux--forever.
Linux is fine now, and has been for at least the past 5 years if not more. Even HiDPI works just fine now which has been a pain point for a while (at least, it works great on KDE).
That being said, my daily driver is macOS ever since apple silicon released, purely due to the laptop hardware. I keep a reasonably powerful Beelink mini PC mounted under my desk running ubuntu server and most of my work happens there over SSH with Tailscale. If you're primarily a laptop user, I'd definitely recommend this set up (or something similar), you get the best of both worlds.
I switched a month or two on my desktop. Then when that turned out good, I switched my laptop to Linux, too. No hardware issues on either one, and the WiFi on the laptop works just fine. (My desktop is connected by Ethernet.)
Sleep is really most useful for laptops and I'm not sure fast boot really solves that use case as well as it does on a desktop (where you really never got as much out of sleep anyways since you're always plugged in).
raises hand As of this month, my Windows-only desktop gaming computer is now dual-boot, and I only boot back to Windows for a particular game.
The main pain-point was that the remote backup service had no Linux client. I ended up solving it with restic, but I acknowledge that isn't a turnkey solution for archetypal Aunt Tillie.
Just like Windows 11 isnt Windows 95, Linux today isnt Linux from 1995. Even if you use Arch, with nothing configured, still in the install CLI its pretty much just:
'station wlan0 connect "SSID"'
'enter Password:*** '
Done
and this is the worst case scenario, with arch, a minimalist distro, where most things arent there or configured by default.
I built a new desktop PC last fall and every Linux distro I have tried this year has WiFi working out of the box. Contrast that with Windows where I need to keep the drivers on a USB stick so I can bootstrap myself on a fresh install
The MacBook I use for work sucks and has weird issues when it wakes up from sleep. I've started having to restart my computer to fix them. I can't remember the last time I've had to do that.
During COVID, studies supporting working from home leading to higher productivity were highlighted. Now when companies want people to come back, studies supporting working in an office producing higher productivity are highlighted. Funny how that works and this post is already 100+ points.
*cant wait to see those down votes for this comment
Kind of wild that people don't just do both. Let your reports who want to sit in traffic commute to the office, and let the ones who don't want to do that work from home. Problem freakin' solved. Where's my Nobel prize?
We live in a culture of transparency where you are rewarded for confessing your weaknesses. At the time people tackled their issues outside of print, outside of public discourse. Just because there's no record of a person's private life doesn't mean it was taboo. It's just not for you to know about.
I suspect they are talking about pop culture which is awash with drama.
But it always has been, just less self-important/self-reporting drama (x is getting divorced because they told us!), and more ‘we just found out x celebrity is getting divorced’.
This is bigger deal than it seems. Risk bureaucracies are hugely influential in terms of how companies/debt/equity is valued. They also tend to grow over time. This is probably a huge growth opportunity for insurance and a rock solid growth ceiling for AI use in certain industries. This is also not something that will go away. There is pretty much no political maneuvering or marketing or industry growth that will suppress it. This will lead to forced AI disclosures and insurance defined best practices that will likely not allow "hands-off" AI output without user sign off. Paradoxically this might create a moat for bigger AI firms who can keep up with the requirements.
Seems like this could also be a big effect on the massive data center buildout.
> exclusion WR Berkley proposed would bar claims involving “any actual or alleged use” of AI, including any product or service sold by a company “incorporating” the technology.
Read liberally this would make every AI data center un-insurable. If it goes towards issues like you cannot actually insure the facility, insure the hardware involved, and insure related ideas, then it starts to be a really serious financial issue from a company risk perspective.
Much like housing, there's a lot of areas where you simply cannot build without proper insurance that will cover likely claims.
You seem more familiar with the space than I am so I figured I'd ask - do you think this would be addressed with the proposed compliance framework AIUC-1? The article mentioned the startup behind it (Artificial Intelligence Underwriting Company). I don't know enough about AI usage or implementation to be able to evaluate if the proposed framework would actually make AI usage more dependable but I could see insurance companies requiring (AIUC-1 or other)-compliance for coverage
Humans have biases. If LLMs are trained on content made by humans, it will be biased. This will always be built in (since what counts as bias is also cultural and contingent)
The problem is that those models don't follow human bias, but journalist and publisher bias, since that's where most of the sources come from.
The problem is that journalist and publisher bias is something that is controlled by a small group and doesn't reflect common biases, but is pushed from the top, from the mighty upon commons.
That way, what LLMs actually do is push that bias further down the throats of common people. Basically a new propaganda outlet. And the article shows exactly that, that the LLM bias pushed upon us is not the same as common bias found in the population.
This is the kind of thing people get excited about for the first couple of months and then barely use it going forward. It's amazing how quickly the novelty of this amazing technology wears off. You realize how necessary meaning/identity/narrative is to media and how empty it gets (regardless of the output) when those elements are missing.
No shade to the poster but we don't really make much, so not buying American is very easy. Besides tomatoes and apples most people in the US probably don't even own anything made here.
Would you call iPhones chinese and not american? No matter, I think obviously people would consider them american, and importantly, the way they function and respect or trample consumer rights is decided by american citizens.
Maybe the US doesn't make much per se, but it certainly decides and influences much.
US produces a lot of digital goods. A lot of high quality digital goods to be precise, which makes this a tragedy. I want so much to just buy Apple products and have the best setup for music production, but I just can't because of what I laid out in the post.
A ton of people own iPhones, drive Fords and Chevrolets, and buy a lot of local produce. Anybody lucky enough to own a house also own a locally-produced one.
reply