Markets

The Nasdaq Composite

The Nasdaq Composite is the technology-heavy US equity benchmark — roughly 3,000 stocks, almost entirely those listed on the Nasdaq exchange, with a heavy tilt toward software, semiconductors, biotech, and consumer technology. It's the index that captures the AI rally, the growth-stock bull run, the dot-com mania, and every other tech-driven episode in modern US market history.

May 14, 2026^IXICequities · us-stocks · technology · growth · high-beta

NASDAQ

—

The growth-tilted US equity benchmark. If the S&P 500 is the diversified default and the Dow is the historical curiosity, the Nasdaq is the cyclical sentiment gauge — the index whose movements tell you whether tech and growth are leading or being abandoned. It's the index that captured the dot-com mania of the late 1990s, the post-GFC tech recovery, the COVID-era growth boom, and most recently the AI-driven re-rating of 2023-2024. When the Nasdaq diverges from the S&P 500 in either direction, that divergence is itself a market signal.

NASDAQ

—

What it measures

The Nasdaq Composite is a market-capitalization-weighted index of essentially all stocks listed on the Nasdaq exchange:

Constituents include US and foreign companies (the Nasdaq has historically been more willing than the NYSE to list non-US issuers). Sector composition is heavily skewed to technology (~50%), with smaller weights in healthcare/biotech (~10%), consumer discretionary (~15%), communication services (~5%), and financials/industrials (~5% each).

We track the series via Yahoo Finance's ^IXIC ticker — the Composite, the broader of the two main Nasdaq indices. The Nasdaq 100 (^NDX) — the 100 largest non-financial Nasdaq names — is what the QQQ ETF tracks and is the more common reference in trading contexts. They move together but the Composite has more long-tail volatility from its smaller constituents.

Why it matters

Two angles.

The growth/tech-leadership read-out angle. When the Nasdaq outperforms the S&P 500 by meaningful margins, growth and tech sectors are leading the market. When it underperforms, value, financials, or defensive sectors are taking over. The Nasdaq-vs-S&P spread (often plotted as (Nasdaq/S&P) - 1) is one of the cleanest sentiment-and-positioning indicators available — it tells you what part of the market is doing the actual work. The 2023-2024 AI rally was a clean Nasdaq-leadership episode; the late-2024 small-cap rotation was a clean broadening of breadth that briefly compressed the Nasdaq-S&P spread.

The discount-rate-sensitivity angle. Because Nasdaq constituents are dominated by long-duration growth stocks, the index is mechanically more sensitive to changes in interest rates than the broader market. This makes the Nasdaq the cleanest single equity read on monetary policy transmission: a hawkish surprise that moves UST10Y up by 25 bps will move the Nasdaq down by approximately 1.5-2.5% in the same session, even if no underlying fundamental has changed. The 2022 selloff (-33% peak-to-trough) was almost entirely discount-rate math driven by UST10Y rising from ~1.5% to ~4%.

What moves it, and what it moves

Moves the Nasdaq:

The 10-year Treasury yield. The dominant single driver of Nasdaq multiples. A 100 bp rise in UST10Y compresses Nasdaq multiples by approximately 15-20%, all else equal.
Mag 7 earnings. Six of the seven Mag 7 names are Nasdaq-listed and dominate the index weights. A meaningful beat or miss from NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, or Meta moves the index by 1-3% on its own.
AI capex narrative. Since 2023, the AI investment thesis has driven a substantial portion of Nasdaq moves. Hyperscaler capex guidance, NVIDIA chip-supply commentary, and AI revenue beats/misses have become routine market-moving events.
Risk appetite. When sentiment shifts toward risk-on, the Nasdaq tends to outperform; risk-off, underperform.
Foreign tech exposure. Major non-US tech names listed on the Nasdaq (NVIDIA's Asia exposure, ASML cross-listing dynamics, ADR flows) add international beta.

The Nasdaq moves:

The VIX (highly correlated movements during sell-offs; the Nasdaq tends to lead VIX spikes).
Bond yields (a "growth-stock crash" can re-anchor the Fed's reaction function, pulling yields lower).
The broader US equity narrative — when the Nasdaq leads or lags, that's the day's market story.
Crypto and other high-beta risk assets (correlated risk-on / risk-off behavior).
IPO timing and pricing in tech (the Nasdaq's level is the cleanest signal for when growth-equity issuers can get rich valuations).

A worked example: the dot-com era and its aftermath

In March 1999, the Nasdaq Composite was at approximately 2,400. The 12-month period that followed produced one of the most documented asset bubbles in modern history. By March 10, 2000, the Nasdaq closed at 5,048. The index had more than doubled in 12 months. The price-to-earnings ratio of the Nasdaq, calculated on aggregated index earnings, was approximately 175x — by comparison, the S&P 500 traded at ~30x. Companies like Pets.com IPO'd, went bankrupt, and were forgotten within 14 months. The 2000 dot-com peak is the benchmark against which every subsequent tech-led rally is compared.

The downturn was severe. The Nasdaq fell 78% from peak to trough, bottoming at 1,114 in October 2002. The decline took 2.5 years to play out. Many constituent companies that survived (Cisco, Microsoft, Oracle) saw their share prices fall 60-80% and didn't recover their peak prices for 15+ years. The dot-com bust is what makes "but it's different this time" such a loaded phrase in tech-investor discussions.

The Nasdaq didn't decisively cross its 2000 peak again until April 2015 — a full 15-year wait for a complete recovery. The post-2015 era has produced what may be the longest sustained Nasdaq bull market in history: from 2015's ~5,000 to over 18,000 by mid-2024, a 3.6x in nine years, driven by Mag 7 dominance and the AI re-rating.

The current cycle, and the open question

The "is this another dot-com?" question is the dominant macro debate around the Nasdaq:

The "this time is different" view. Mag 7 companies have real, durable, dominant business franchises with billions of users, deep moats, hundreds of billions of dollars of free cash flow, and explicit pricing power. Their valuations may be elevated but they're justified by their actual financial performance. AI investment is producing measurable productivity gains. The 2000 era's eyeballs-and-clicks justifications don't apply.
The "it's exactly the same" view. Forward P/E ratios of leading AI names (NVIDIA at 35x+, MSFT at 30+) are echoing dot-com levels. The narrative-driven valuation framework — "AI will change everything" — is structurally similar to the 1999 internet narrative. When the narrative breaks, multiples compress hard.
The "rhymes but doesn't repeat" view. Some characteristics overlap (concentration, multiple expansion, retail mania at the edges), but the financial fundamentals of the modern leaders are dramatically stronger than the 2000-era names. A correction of 20-30% in the Nasdaq is more likely than a 78% bust.

Watch points: Nasdaq vs S&P 500 ratio at extreme highs (a leading indicator of mean-reversion pressure); Mag 7 vs the rest of the S&P 500 (the dispersion of returns is the cleanest read on concentration); NVIDIA forward P/E and revenue growth (the single most sensitive name in the AI thesis); and the spread between AI capex guidance and AI revenue realization (when guidance starts overshooting realized revenue, the narrative is fragile).

FAQ

What's the difference between the Nasdaq Composite and the Nasdaq 100?

The Nasdaq Composite (`^IXIC`) is all stocks listed on the Nasdaq exchange — roughly 3,000 names. The Nasdaq 100 (`^NDX`) is a subset: the 100 largest non-financial Nasdaq-listed companies, weighted by modified market cap. The Nasdaq 100 is what most people actually mean when they say 'the Nasdaq' in a market-commentary context; it's also what the QQQ ETF tracks, which is the third-largest US equity ETF by AUM. The Composite is broader (includes more biotech, small-cap tech, and Nasdaq-listed industrials) and has more long-tail volatility. The 100 has higher concentration in the Mag 7 mega-caps.

Why is the Nasdaq considered 'high-beta'?

Beta measures how much an asset moves relative to the broad market. The Nasdaq has a historical beta to the S&P 500 of approximately 1.15-1.25 — meaning it moves about 20% more, in both directions, than the broader market. The reason is composition: high-duration tech and growth names dominate, and these are mechanically more sensitive to changes in the discount rate (via UST10Y) and risk sentiment than value or defensive sectors. In a bull market, the Nasdaq leads on the way up. In a bear market, it falls harder. The 2022 selloff is a clean example: S&P 500 -19%, Nasdaq -33%.

What was 'the dot-com bust' and why does it matter for understanding the Nasdaq?

The Nasdaq Composite peaked at 5,048 on March 10, 2000, having more than doubled in the prior 12 months as internet-era enthusiasm drove tech multiples to historic extremes (Cisco traded at 200x earnings; companies with no revenue had multi-billion market caps). The peak gave way to a 78% drawdown — Nasdaq reached 1,114 by October 2002 — taking 15 years to fully recover. The episode is the textbook example of an asset-class bubble: rapid price appreciation justified by narrative rather than earnings, then a sudden re-pricing when reality intruded. Modern AI-themed enthusiasm has prompted ongoing comparisons, with debate centering on whether NVIDIA-led AI fundamentals are more durable than the dot-com era's eyeballs-and-clicks justifications.

Why are Mag 7 stocks (almost all Nasdaq-listed) so dominant in both indices?

Six of the seven Mag 7 stocks (Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, Nvidia, Meta — not Tesla) are listed on Nasdaq. Their growth from a combined market cap of roughly $3T in 2017 to over $15T by 2024 has driven both the Nasdaq's outperformance and the S&P 500's tech concentration. Because the S&P 500 includes them via cap-weighting, the two indices increasingly move together when these names lead, and diverge when broader breadth participates. The trailing 5-year correlation between Nasdaq and S&P 500 daily returns is around 0.92 — closer than at any point since the indices coexisted.

Why does the Nasdaq get especially volatile around rate decisions?

Discount-rate sensitivity. Growth stocks derive most of their value from cash flows many years in the future. When UST10Y rises, the present value of those cash flows falls disproportionately compared to value stocks (whose value is concentrated in nearer-term cash flows). The Nasdaq, being tech-heavy, is dominated by growth stocks. A 50bp move in UST10Y can produce a 5-8% move in the Nasdaq vs. 3-4% in the broader S&P 500. This sensitivity is why the Nasdaq tends to be the index that moves most in real-time on FOMC announcement days and CPI prints.