[richwater]

The Nasdaq is a shit index to begin with. There are so many other options.

[dehrmann]

What you didn't elaborate on is that it's a poor investment thesis, so while the association is Nasdaq == tech, it's not entirely true, and it missing things if what you really want is tech. It also penalizes small floats less than S&P 500, enabling these shenanigans.

[tyre]

The NASDAQ is up 27% in the past 1 year. S&P 500 up 21%, DOW +20%.

So, it's doing pretty well!

[mattkrause]

If the argument is that it's being manipulated, I'm not sure these stats help.

[tyre]

That's fair! I didn't read the comment I was replying to as being about the manipulation but, if so, I agree with their opinion.

[hn_go_brrrrr]

I didn't read it about the manipulation either, but neither did I read it as a criticism of the returns.

[staticman2]

I'm sure people planning to invest for only 1 year of their lifespan and began their investment journey exactly 1 year ago and who are in the process of selling everything they own today never to invest in stocks ever again will find that Nasdaq one year performance very useful information!

[jrflo]

NASDAQ is famously overweighted in tech. It saw an 80% drop in the aftermath of the dotcom bubble, while the S&P500 only had a 40% drop. It's a double edged sword, with the AI boom it's benefiting, if that reverses it will fall proportionally to those gains.

[groundzeros2015]

Yes. A strategy with tradeoffs does not make it a “shit index”.

[wildzzz]

And a big chunk of that is the AI bubble. How are the rest of the non-AI industries doing?

https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/indices/equity/sp-500-ex-i...

[inigyou]

Interesting, so a shit index is whichever goes down and a good index is whichever goes up?

Does the same rule work in crypto?

[tclancy]

Always a FTSE truther.