Prof G Markets · Tuesday, July 7, 2026
The inclusion of SpaceX in the Nasdaq 100, despite negative feedback during the comment period, highlights concerns about the integrity of passive investing. Critics like Michael Green argue that the rule changes favor specific companies and insiders, potentially undermining investor trust and exposing passive investors to risks associated with companies that might not meet traditional listing standards.
“It seems as though, and if we were to just sort of go through the winners and losers here, I think you and I both agree that the loser is the passive investor who doesn't really know what's happening and the rules are being changed, uh, basically for this specific company, SpaceX, potentially for Elon Musk.”
“It almost breaks down the whole point of passive investing.”
“The big winner is there are those who are seeking liquidity. The insiders who are actually looking to sell shares, whether those are investors who invested during its private period or whether they are employees who have waited for liquidity. The answer is it's the insiders.”
“It's, you know, it's a little bit of a slap in the face to see somebody become the world's first trillionaire on the basis of manipulating an index that we were all told we could trust.”