CRSP

rawj5561

anyone still holding CRSP? I remember years ago this stock had a lot of hype.

Sufficient_Habit5091

>“The results also help to explain why active strategies, which tend to be poorly diversified, most often underperform,” says Bessembinder, who found that the largest returns come from very few stocks overall — just 86 stocks have accounted for $16 trillion in wealth creation, half of the stock market total, over the past 90 years. https://wpcarey.asu.edu/department-finance/faculty-research/do-stocks-outperform-treasury-bills Competition, new disruptive threats means companies go bust and lose often: >I calculate that the approximately 25,300 companies that issued stocks appearing in the CRSP common stock database since 1926 are collectively responsible for lifetime shareholder wealth creation of nearly $35 trillion, measured as of December 2016. However, just five firms (Exxon Mobile, Apple, Microsoft, General Electric, and International Business Machines) account for 10% of the total wealth creation. The 90 top-performing companies, slightly more than one-third of 1% of the companies that have listed common stock, collectively account for over half of the wealth creation. The 1,092 top- performing companies, slightly more than 4% of the total, account for all of the net wealth creation. That is, the remaining 96% of companies whose common stock has appeared in the CRSP data collectively generate lifetime dollar gains that matched gains on one-month Treasury bills. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2900447

MatrixOrigin

I asked Gemini how much money ITOT and VXF would have to pour in. It said around $25M combined. As for VTI though: >VTI cannot buy Trulieve because it does not follow the S&P Total Market Index.While VTI is labeled a "Total Market" fund, it only tracks the CRSP US Total Market Index. Index funds are strictly bound by the rules of their specific index provider. Even if a stock qualifies for a "Total Market" index created by S&P, it means absolutely nothing to Vanguard's VTI unless CRSP changes its rules too.

Revfunky

I love it. You should take risk at your age. If you read enough of my comments you will see a 4% asset allocation along with a 25% trailing stop. If you want a stock that hits 10x you won’t hit it with a trailing stop. I’ll give you two for the sake of time. Which is worth more than money. CRSP is gene splicing technology that has already cured one disease. This is a longer term play. They aren’t profitable but they are heading in the right direction. I would buy on the dips till 2030. I think this stock will mint millionaires. Seabridge gold SA should be in your portfolio. This stock will either go back to $10 or hit $100. I would enter in 3 tranches. These are both speculative plays.

CD274

I avoid all crispr tech stocks, just not sold on clinical applications being safe tbh. But CRSP looks pretty range bound so probably a decent bet for wheeling? I just wouldn't hold it long term. None of the gene editing tech tbh. (I did half a PhD in genetics then dropped out, and it was on DNA repair/DNA instability, just lots of things can go wrong with this tech in clinical trials) So tldr; they both look on to wheel, personally wouldn't hold and forget?

Valkyrie_Skuld

Hell yeah. Okay I bought beam because it's in beam buy range but then I also bought crsp and I don't fully know why, it was too impulsive. But I don't really trade CRSP so should I just scalp it or sell ccs? Is it worth selling ccs?

Valkyrie_Skuld

Listen, I bought BEAM but I know why I bought BEAM it's just a range trade. But then I looked at BEAM's earnings and thought "oh that's kinda trash wonder what CRSP did, saw that CRSPs earnings were better than BEAM and bought CRSP which is fine except I don't trade CRSP so I have no fucking idea if I did a good thing or a bad thing but now I have both

Apple2o

If you are talking about CRSP that shit has done nothing for over a decade now

Revfunky

CRSP has to be one of my more speculative trades. They aren’t profitable this nor will they be next year, but they are going in the right direction. Last time I checked they were sitting on $2.4 billion in cash, and raised another $600 million. The whole company is less than $6 billion, a big chunk of what you are paying for is cash in the bank. CRSP is almost like something from science fiction. They use a molecular scissors to splice the DNA. They have already cured one disease and have a pipeline of other treatments lined up. The other one I would say Life Time Holdings LTH. Since entering the position in 2023 we are up 165%. I think there is still a lot of room to grow. Life Time blends the best aspects of a fitness center, a country club, and a resort. Even in a tight consumer spending environment, Life Time has consistently raised its dues without a material drop in membership retention. That’s a reliable sign the business has a defensible moat. They collect steady monthly dues, sell high-margin services, and monetize a loyal membership base through events and corporate wellness contracts. In the second quarter, net income rose 42% on a 14% increase in revenue. Total membership topped 850,000 through June, while averaging monthly dues rose 12% to $245. It markets to an affluent customer base. The typical member has $170k in take home pay and trending up. This has the potential to grow several fold in the years ahead.

Prudent-Corgi3793

MU is highest and it's been the highest for most of this year. VTV is very easy to track because it passively follows the CRSP Large Cap Value index, which only rebalances once per quarter, including most recently on 2026-07-31. I assume you're pulling from various sources that say JPM is 3.49% and MU is 3.44% on that date. However, that was also the absolute nadir for most of the semis because of the Situational Awareness situation. Since then, JPM is up +1.66%, MU up +13.34%, and VTV overall up +2.43%. I calculate the ETF holdings more frequently.

ThatOneRedditBro

CRSP

colorcrazecnl225

CRSP my king...

StophJS

My dear CRSP leaving me behind again

Ok-Amphibian3164

Grab CRSP first sympathy play ▶️

liquidtv78

Thanks for the DD. how do you feel about CRSP?

UnObtainium17

That is the reason why I have a really tiny position on IONQ, MRNA and CRSP. Right at the very bottom of my list if i sorted my stocks by %. I'd be lucky if even one of those turned into a homerun.

Ahamadrayasbaboon

With Morningstar rebranding CRSP indexes to add their name, I wouldn’t be too surprised if they got greedy with whatever agreement they had with Robinhood. 

IvoryTowerResident

mine is CRSP

DontPeeInTheWater

Not over long time periods (decades), they don't, and the evidence is quite overwhelming. Some academic research: Sharpe (1991), "The Arithmetic of Active Management," Financial Analysts Journal 47(1), 7-9. Since active managers collectively hold the market, their pre-cost return must equal the market's, so after costs they must trail in aggregate. Sharpe's line is that "the average actively-managed dollar must underperform the average passively-managed dollar, net of costs" Carhart (1997), "On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance 52(1), 57-82. the results "do not support the existence of skilled or informed mutual fund portfolio managers Fama and French (2010), "Luck versus Skill in the Cross-Section of Mutual Fund Returns," Journal of Finance 65(5), 1915-1947. The aggregate active fund portfolio resembles the market portfolio, but the costs of active management pass through to investors as lower returns, and few funds produce "benchmark-adjusted expected returns sufficient to cover their costs." S&P Dow Jones SPIVA Scorecards. Not peer-reviewed, but the longest continuous dataset and built on the CRSP survivorship-bias-free database. In 2025, 79% of active large-cap US equity funds trailed the S&P 500. Over 20 years the figure is 93%. The Persistence Scorecard is the more damaging document: of 164 large-cap funds in the top quartile in 2021, 20.1% were still there in 2022 and 0.0% by 2023; only 4.5% of top-half funds stayed top-half for five consecutive years. etc etc. As I said, an exceedingly small number of people have the ability and resources to consistently beat the market. People who think that they are among the tiny few are exceptionally likely to be wrong.

greytoc

VT is not a UCITS and may be considered non-compliant in the UK. What you are probably reading may not apply to you. Afaik - there are no UCITS funds that track the CRSP US Total Market index. Is there any particular reason why you want to track the CRSP US Total Market index? That index is not more diversified than the combination of WRDA and HEMC. VT is a US market only index fund. If you want a single equity fund that is globally diverse - look at UCITS funds that track the MSCI Global Market index. There are a bunch of them. Don't forget that you may want to use a currency hedged fund if you care about currency fluctuations against the pound sterling.

Professional_Help_85

I for one would love a good CRSP NTLA pump. Alas they are in the gutter too

Technical_Drawing758

The impasse might be smaller than it looks: crosswalks map *codes*, not companies. If you can pull each defunct name's historical SIC (CRSP's SICCD or Compustat's SICH — both preserved on the tape for dead companies), any SIC→GICS table still applies; the firm doesn't need to exist today. That said, with WRDS access you can skip SIC→GICS almost entirely: 1. Membership incl. dead names: CRSP's S&P 500 constituents list (dsp500list — PERMNO with entry/exit dates), survivorship-free by construction. 2. Link PERMNO→GVKEY via the CRSP/Compustat Merged link table. 3. Sector: Compustat's *historical* GICS file (co\_hgic) gives point-in-time GICS for delisted names too. Coverage thins for companies that died before GICS launched in 1999 — for those, fall back to historical SIC + your crosswalk, or Ken French's SIC-based industry buckets if you need consistent sectors more than official GICS. 4. Weights: shares × price from CRSP monthly files at each rebalance date. (Table names from memory — WRDS's dataset search will surface them.) WRDS support is also genuinely responsive on linking questions like this, and quant.stackexchange has a few worked threads on rebuilding historical index membership. Good luck — a 1996-2025 concentration series is a satisfying thing once it runs.

WrapperMiss

ASTS has real contract agreements in the billions and has proven technology + execution.. Can't say the same for CRSP. And TDOC operates at a net loss. When ASTS satellite constellation is complete (currently at 4 satellites in orbit, 3 more set to launch in a couple of weeks), they'll begin generating revenue at extremely high profit margins compared to the average tech company.

captainstrange94

People chirping about RKLB and ASTS reminds me of CRSP and TDOC hype in 2020-21

StophJS

Only a matter of time here before CRSP rallies a quick 20% again.

Laureles2

CRSP will be interesting. I invested several years ago and am down 40-50% (albeit on a small base). I was excited about MRNA too and sold after losing about 50%. Very hard to tell in Pharma.

Professional_Help_85

CRSP NTLA bagholders come forth

Revfunky

This one is barely above our initial recommended price. But it go much higher soon. I’m talking about CRSP- CRISPR Therapeutics. CRSPR isn’t profitable but they are sitting on about $2.4 billion in cash, and recently raised another $600 million on top of that. That’s a lot of wiggle room for a company at this stage. The whole company is valued at less than $6 billion. This is the best bet you can make on gene editing. There is volatility and you don’t want to put your kid’s while college fund in it. For those that can handle the ride there is a lot of upside potential. With biotech at this stage, the financials matter less than the pipeline. Investors aren’t not buying today’s earnings; they are buying tomorrow’s cures. My strategy for this play remains the same. I’m buying the dips until 2030. As usual I suggest no more than 4% of your portfolio total go into one investment. Also we don’t use a trailing stop in the ten-bagger portfolio.

jginvest71

Vanguard uses several CRSP indexes, and they are very lenient when a company moves up in cap size. It’s not an automatic removal. VB, a small cap fund, is about 1/3 mid cap. That’s because of the leniency of the underlying index. On the flip side, detractors will say it’s not truly a small cap fund because of this.

Own-Recipe5908

Nah, sold out of SOXL between 80-250 and only scalping back and forth. And my biotech exposure is a bunch of small buys but mostly CRSP which is eating shit after a good week.

gbgftw

Half my portfolio is biotech now from having been almost 100% tech. It’s been doing a LOT better than my tech. Check out VRTX, ALNY, MDGL, REGN, CRSP, SMMT, NTLA and BEAM. A lot of upside and good momentum in this space.

Professional_Help_85

Can this lady please sell out from her CRSP NLTA positions so us bag holders can get out 🙏

CaptainDorfman

I hate to say it but $4B of passive flows isn’t going to move the needle much compared to a $85B float. Couple of percent tops, but you’ll also have people selling into it so might be a net negative. Russel and CRSP (VTI) already bought in and it didn’t do anything to save the dump from $225 to $150. Don’t expect the QQQ to be any different

BlatantPlatitude

CRSP and EDIT at their peaks

ThanksDependent1001

CRSP and Beam 🚀

harpers25

What I said is that fast track entry isn't new. "Since 2017, CRSP indexes have included newly public companies on the fifth trading day after listing." https://www.morningstar.com/stocks/how-will-mega-ipos-change-face-us-stock-market FTSE *Russell* added fast track for US indexes. VT is FTSE Global. “FTSE Global Equity Index Series and the FTSE UK Index Series already have a Fast Entry Rule." https://www.lseg.com/en/media-centre/press-releases/ftse-russell/2026/ftse-russell-introduces-ipo-fast-entry-enhancements-for-russell-us-indexes

usrnmz

FTSE (VT) and CRSP (VTI) both changed their rules to accomodate SpaceX.

phybere

Expected, the index funds tracking CRSP had 5 days to buy in, 20% each day. Now that they're not buying, down goes the price.

Margin_Call_Me_Maybe

Not tomorrow really, no. June 18: S&P Total Market Index (TMI), CRSP indexes, and FTSE Russell rebalancing and inclusions. June 25: MSCI USA index inclusions. June 26: Russell 1000 inclusion takes effect after market close. July 6: Nasdaq rebalances the Nasdaq-100 to include SpaceX shares.

DanGo20

SO tomorrow is the 18th. Has anyone seen an announcement of a forced by by one of the indexes - since it is the fifth day? CRSP? I've read Vangard has some sort of exception - but this is from the people pleasing Chat GPT

adarkerforest

dammit just bought CRSP

ThanksDependent1001

Folks drop stock suggestions in here from time to time. Don’t sleep on CRSP. Great hold (not 0dte) gamble. But options are cheap and it’s going to break out over the next 6-12 months. ;)

Prudent-Corgi3793

I calculate not only my returns against the S&P TR, but I also calculate the beta, volatility, Sharpe, Sortino, etc. over the relevant time period and over rolling time windows. And I do it with other benchmarks like the CRSP Total US Market TR, Large Growth TR, MSCI ACWI TR, etc. to justify my decision to continue picking individual stocks to make sure I’m not only beating these benchmarks, but beating them on a risk-adjusted basis.

PlanktonPlane5789

The S&P peaked in August, 2000 and recovered to all-time highs in October of 2006 if you include dividends being reinvested along the way, so much closer to 6 years than 7. For NASDAQ it took 14yrs and 3 months. If you didn't choose concentration risk and just went with VTI (which, yes, it didn't exist until June 2001 so we don't really have a peak to compare, but it tracks the CRSP US Total Market so we can use that as a proxy) it was about the same as the S&P500 recovery time: 6 years. People can whinge all they want but if you were in the accumulation phase and you were also contributing the max to your 401(k) and IRA each year you were above your initial peak in 2000 by 2003 for the S&P500 and 2004 for the NASDAQ. Ironically, by the end of 2014, the NASDAQ portfolio would actually exceed the S&P500 portfolio by ~4.5%. Having a 14yr period to buy into the NASDAQ at a discount was a GOOD thing for everyone accumulating. Just keep investing and tune out the noise.

InvisibleEar

The largest component of the CRSP US Large Cap Value Index is MU? That doesn't seem right

Kaiizeddit

I'm trying to understand how long his valuation is likely to last, doing sanity check of something ChatGPT told me about SpaceX index inclusion demand. It estimated the following: |Date|Index|Estimated buying|Why?| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Jun 19|CRSP (VTI etc.)|$2B-$4B|Early inclusion in CRSP indexes.| |Jun 26|FTSE|$3B-$6B|FTSE trackers need to add SpaceX.| |Jun 26|MSCI|$6B-$10B|MSCI World/ACWI trackers need to add SpaceX.| |Jul 6|Nasdaq-100|$6B-$8B|Nasdaq's new 3x float adjustment increases SpaceX's effective index weight.| |Later|Other funds|$5B+|Benchmark-aware funds and delayed buyers.| |\*\*Total\*\*||\*\*\\\~$22B-$33B\*\*|About 20-25% of the estimated float.| \* Do these buying estimates look realistic? \* Can index funds buy shares before the inclusion date, or do they need to buy everything on the actual day? \* If that's true, does it seem plausible that the rally will last at least until June 26 due to this buying pressure, especially since another round of index buying is expected afterward, giving investors less incentive to sell before t

Hitnake

Everyone in here is dividing by market cap! wrong denominator. Only $75B of SpaceX actually floats, and the forced index buying across all the providers (Nasdaq weights it at 3x float on July 6, plus CRSP, plus Russell) is $9B = roughly 12% of every tradable share and all this is bought by people who aren't allowed to say no! But OP is right, the move is at announcement, not implementation. Tesla ran up then fell 6% the day it actually got added to S&P 500. Buying July 6 = being the exit liquidity! Someone did the full math on this (went through 32k funds, Tesla call was +43% vs +40% actual): [https://www.pouyabehmaram.com/articles/spacex-forced-buying](https://www.pouyabehmaram.com/articles/spacex-forced-buying)

PoopyisSmelly

If they could go public fine without indexes, why have IPOs been declining since 2001 and why has M&A volume been in steady decline since 2005? Why has Private Equity, Venture Capital, and Private Credit exploded? Why is the average age of IPO roughly 3x over the last 25 years? It is difficult and costly for companies to go public. Im not denying Nasdaq and specifically QQQ are stupid, they always have been, nothing new there, their index is just as irrelevant as the Dow. But Russell, CRSP and S&P are all rules based and trying to remain relevant and ensure they can turn the tide of companies who dont feel they can successfully or easily raise capital anymore, and I personally agree that they should do that.

wandererarkhamknight

For Vanguard funds tracking Moringstar (CRSP) or FTSE, it will be after close of the 5th trading day after IPO.

Due_Contact_8271

CRSP? That’s tough

dwarfinvasion

True, but does include the indexes like CRSP and therefore Vanguard Total Stock market and most target date funds. So I found most of my funds will have exposure even though I'm in broad vanguard funds. Have considered switching into strict sp500 funds to reduce exposure.

Single_Guarantee9545

nice 50% loss on CRSP

IronyElSupremo

> Are you buying [Space X]? Not really as most of my US large cap is in the S&P 500 which is waiting for at least 12 months, probably more until SpaceX becomes this thingy .. think it’s called “profitable”. Fwiw, the Russell-FTSE and CRSP (some Vanguard) indexes will buy in 5 days at float value iirc with hardly any adjustments to their ground rules .. so a large cap US investor who wants some can look into those. Now I own a growth slice with the US portion in a Russell 1000 growth etf and it’ll buy a bit in 5 days .. so I will have minuscule exposure soon (plus the other incoming large IPOs). It’ll be limited to that etf tho. Also Vanguard has their VXF etf (its S&P ex-500 “catch-all” extended index w/mids, smalls, and trad IPOs/ascendants so will see if/how it handles SPCX .. there’s more than the S&P 500 in that family), so will see if and when they get into SpaceX, OpenAI, Anthropic, etc..

hwaj47

Who gives a fuck about the valuation! It’s being added to Russell, FTSE, CRSP, MSCI, Nasdaq

Due-Set5398

I assume there is a large cap mutual fund alternative that wont do this? Maybe someone will offer it. What’s the deal with CRSP tracking funds? Similar to S&P.

JohnnyFartmacher

VTI is indexed to the CRSP US Total Maket Index. CRSP specifically changed their free float rule to enable SpaceX to be given the 5-day fast track status. VOO is indexed to the S&P 500 which did not bend their rules for SpaceX. If you want to completely avoid SpaceX (for now at least), VTI isn't for you. QQQ bent over the most, adding a 3x float multiplier which gives SpaceX 3x the weighting it would have otherwise had due to their low float. CRSP did not add a float multiplier

Revfunky

Either you are doing your own research or listening to someone else’s. My influence for finding stocks that grow 10x or ten-baggers was the man who coined the phrase Peter Lynch in One Up on Wall Street. I’m looking for seven traits. 1.They are tremendous innovators. 2. They have outstanding sales growth- sales growth not profit growth. 3. They protect their margins. 4. They beat consensus estimates. 5. They are small to mid-cap companies. 6. They are relatively unknown. 7. They have significant insider ownership. Will that help you find the next millionaire making stock? Probably not. I will save you some time and give you one from my list. CRSP. This is the essence of an early adopter. CRSP cures disease, not treats disease, cures. I think this stock will mint millionaires. You can buy and add on the dips until 2030. We don’t use our customary 25% trailing stop for ten- baggers. This is a speculative play. We’re not investing in current sales and earnings but rather a platform and the tremendous potential.

Mobile-Bar7732

It will be part of VTI after 5 days because it tracks CRSP U.S. Total Market Index.

IronyElSupremo

Could just go with the “plain Jane S&P 500” as their flagship indexes will not bend their seasoning/profitability screens for mega-IPOs. On the flip side, one could add a slight CRSP or Russell 1000 index “slice” if wanting a tad diffused via the other holdings.

Warrlock608

If I keep options running on this account the only thing I'm really interested in is buying LEAPs on longshots I really like. CRSP, DNA, ACHR, RIVN and a couple others. Farming some premiums with the theta gang is also very tempting.

TheRealSplinter

Many retirement accounts will be affected because CRSP US Total index only wait days for inclusion of IPO stocks, and for instance vanguard retirement funds use VTI (which tracks CRSP US Total) for their underlying US stock exposure. However, this is what you want from an index like VTI, and no rules were changed to make it function like this for SpaceX.

No-Improvement3164

Anyone looking at CRSP?

gwelfguy

I've separated my US large cap holding into separate ETFs for growth and value. VUG is the growth holding, and it tracks the CRSP US Large Cap Growth index. I don't think they plan to include SpaceX right away. There is no way that I'm investing in SpaceX stock directly. It will get a temporary bump because of the indexes that will take it on immediately, but that will likely be followed by a significant drop. That's been discussed online ad nauseum. I don't have the faith in my market timing ability or the integrity of the trading system to take that chance.

Oh_he_steal

True. CRSP-based funds as well. So Nasdaq 100, FTSE, and CRSP.

aegis87

My only reason for posting was to highlight his arrogance. If you want more info read the thread or something else. There is nothing informed about his comment, lmao. \- both Russell U.S. Indexes and CRSP indexes adopted fast entry methodologies (it's not gonna be immediate though but after 5 trading days) (in other words only S&P didn't change methodologies) \- fidelity lowered minimum account requirement for spacex ipo from $500k to just $2k \- banks announced they're planning to sell 30% of $SPCX stock to retail at IPO (compared to 5% normally) if you can't discern a pattern worthy of discussion here instead of "Oh geez you guys don't parrot stuff without research" -- i can't help you champ.

Aggressive-Cookie395

CRSP US Russell 1000 / Russell 1000 Growth Nasdaq-100 S&P Dow Jones U.S.

IronyElSupremo

The S&P 500 contains the 500 largest stocks in the U.S. that meet certain profitability standards. So it’s the “gold standard” for broad stock exchanges with its companies being cash machines .. most with a global reach. There’s been some noise about IPOs but looking at the typical IPO, they usually underperform for a while. In the US there are other similar broad indices similar to the SP500 that already allow IPOs in after 5 days (CRSP for Vanguard’s VTI, Russell and, globally, FTSE) should one decide they want mkt weight exposure (after these do minute adjustments).

Mobile-Bar7732

15th trading is only Nasdaq 100. ETFs like VTI it will be included after 5 days. > The Vanguard Total Stock Market ETF (VTI) tracks the CRSP US Total Market Index, which applies a "fast-track" rule to Initial Public Offerings. Under this methodology, eligible mega-cap IPOs are added to the portfolio just five trading days after their public listing.

Ramblefire

CRSP is a research firm so it’ll be included within 5 days, but only at its float. So basically even if it IPOs at 1.75 trillion, I’ll be treated like a company the size of Activision Blizzard.

amishengineer

The point of having rules for index inclusion is to keep *crap* out. So when rules get changed in an appearance of allowing companies into the index that wouldn't normally be included, it's a rule change. Granted 99.9% just see S&P500, CRSP, "Top 500", and don't scrutinize what criteria actually is for inclusion. Even Vanguard's "Total US Market" isn't *total* because of CRSP criteria and *would* have filtered out SpaceX if not for the rule change.

Ahamadrayasbaboon

CRSP is waiving the float requirement (4% vs 10%), but the seasoning period was already 5 days. This isn’t an early entry, though you’re right that they bent the rules to let them in.  The low float means the weighting will be tiny. 

Ahamadrayasbaboon

That’s VOO, not VTI. VTI tracks CRSP all-US. It roughly correlates with VOO/SPY/SP500, but has different inclusion criteria and is much less concentrated, since it includes all capitalization size brackets, basically all US stocks.  They are totally different indexes, though the end result is about the same for investors. 

Axe_Raider

an index is just a list of stocks someone publishes go back in time 50 years and tell john bogle that when he writes a list of stocks he is not allowed to include non-profitable ones CRSP publishes a list of all companies and it has included non-profitable companies for decades you can make your own list of stocks, and no one will make it illegal for you to include or exclude whoever you want

inlocoabsentia

There's SCHB for folks who want something that doesn't track CRSP but still uses a total market index, but this bit from Reuters says that S&P/DJ are going to make tweaks to let SpaceX in (at float weight) that index. [https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/sp-global-keeps-fast-entry-proposal-unchanged-spacex-listing-looms-2026-06-04/](https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/sp-global-keeps-fast-entry-proposal-unchanged-spacex-listing-looms-2026-06-04/)

Ramblefire

CRSP has always been research first. They study the market, the good, the bad, and Elon’s bags. As a consolation, they also are adamant about sizing. CRSP was only ever going to treat SpaceX as a 75 billion dollar company if that. (About the market cap of Activision Blizzard)

Zernfix

VOO will follow what the S&P said and not fast track. VTI does not follow the S&P benchmark, it follows a CRSP benchmark (Morningstar).

Most-Whole-4220

Respect the CRSP choice. I dont own a ton of it, but man am I curious to see where it goes in 10 years

nomickti

Depends what they track, VTI tracks CRSP which will have SpaceX after 5 days, VOO tracks S&P which won't have it immediately.

NoTeslaForMe

Correction: *Some* Vanguard funds. #1 ETF VOO is S&P 500 and some others are Russell. But VT, VTI, and VUG are absolutely CRSP. VTV is too, but there's no way SpaceX is a "value" company. VXF isn't CRSP, but almost by definition includes stocks excluded by S&P 500; for years, Tesla was its largest component. The idea because using CRSP was to wiggle out of the fees S&P wanted Vanguard (and thus shareholders) to pay. But this is a side effect of that.

whatthewhat_007

VTI tracks the CRSP US Total Market Index, not any Russell index. Space X will still probably be included in the CRSP after 5 days though

Zernfix

SpaceX wouldn't hit VTI as hard as you think regardless of whether it's worth $1.75T. Both indexes are float-adjusted, not full market cap. SpaceX is overwhelmingly insider held (Musk plus early VC not to mention the dozen plus share classes), so only the publicly tradeable float gets weighted, not the headline number (CRSP p. 12). It also needs at least 12.5% float just to be added (CRSP p. 10-11). So a $1.75T company with a small float is a much smaller index weight than $1.75T implies. And nothing gets added at full size on day one anyway. CRSP has a seasoning rule (\~20 trading days before ranking) and an IPO lockup rule where locked shares stay out of the float until the lockup expires, using conservative registration statement estimates for the first 180 days (CRSP p. 10-13). The initial weight is built off that and not the full cap. Like I said, VTI tracks CRSP Total Market which has no cap on constituents and just adds names by float cap, spreading the impact across the whole market (CRSP p. 14). VOO and SPY track the S&P 500, a fixed 500 count, committee picked index with extra screens like positive GAAP earnings (S&P p. 8, 12) so a new entrant there actually displaces someone unlike VTI A partial float of even a $1.75T company lands as a single digit percent name at most, not the drastic shift you're picturing for VTI. [https://www.crsp.org/wp-content/uploads/guides/CRSP\_Market\_Indexes\_Methodology\_Guide.pdf](https://www.crsp.org/wp-content/uploads/guides/CRSP_Market_Indexes_Methodology_Guide.pdf) [https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/methodologies/methodology-sp-us-indices.pdf](https://www.spglobal.com/spdji/en/documents/methodologies/methodology-sp-us-indices.pdf)

Zernfix

They use different benchmarks. VTI follows the CRSP US Total Market Index. VTI has a different methodology, the weight % wouldn’t have been as drastic anyways.

whatthewhat_007

Negative. Do some research pal. For example VTI, which tracks the CRSP US Total Market Index has long had a fast-track IPO inclusion of 5 days

the__storm

Fun fact: Vanguard's funds track Morningstar's CRSP indexes, which have a five day fast-track for big IPOs. (Better float weighting than NASDAQ though.)

Round_Ad_40

CRSP: Relaxed float requirements while keeping existing 5-day timeline Russell: Changed the entire timeline from quarterly to 5 days + relaxed float requirements This means VTI will buy SpaceX within ~5 trading days of its IPO if it meets the relaxed investability screens. https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/some-indexes-accelerate-entry-massive-ipos

Ahamadrayasbaboon

Yeah, I’m sure it’ll make up like 0.2% of VT within a week. CRSP waived the inclusion delay.  SPY will be a minimum of 6 months if S&P decides to let it in early. Normal is at least one year, and they are considering reducing it to 6 months. 

Trzebs

You're correct that VTI's 5 day inclusion schedule has never been an issue. The issue is that the CRSP index, which VTI tracks, is changing its rules for the benefit of SpaceX etc. Normally, CRSP would have a longer inclusion period of 1 year I believe, which would give an IPO plenty of time to crash from its inflated price. By the time an index fund like VTI would buy it, the price is no longer inflated.

cyclicalwand

These rules have been in place since 2013 for VTI and probably longer for CRSP. It’s not been changed for SpaceX.

StophJS

CRSP noooo don't leave me behind

Brox42

https://www.investmentnews.com/practice-management/spacexs-index-fund-debut-will-look-nothing-like-what-most-investors-expect-says-jacob-friedman/266776 The more important conversation, Friedman argues, is what the rule changes signal for passive portfolios going forward. "The rule changes at CRSP, Nasdaq, Russell, and S&P were built around low-float megacap IPOs, and any issuer fitting that profile now has a faster path to index inclusion than it would have had a year ago,” he said. “If OpenAI or Anthropic come public at similar valuations with even a 15 to 20% float, the same framework produces much larger weights and much bigger immediate passive demand. SpaceX is the floor of what these inclusions can look like in terms of weight, not the ceiling. Index methodology has become something advisors need to track. With most equity flows now passive, the methodology decisions being made under competitive pressure matter for how every client's portfolio is constructed." For now, the right move for most passive investors remains what it usually is: hold the portfolio, understand what you own, and let the index do its work. The SpaceX numbers will be small. The precedent being set may not be.

08nienhl

CRSP. Gene sequencing and AI will become the next, just a matter of when. I'm picking the name.

Typical_Web_2125

VOO tracks the S&P 500, which has specific inclusion rules like a 12-month seasoning period and four quarters of profitability. Because SpaceX will likely not meet these initially, S&P 500 funds are expected to absorb the stock roughly 6 to 12 months after its public debut. By contrast, total market funds tracking the CRSP US Total Market Index (like VTI) and FTSE indices will likely add the stock within just days of its IPO

phybere

They both track CRSP benchmarks. CRSP updated the rules to be able to include them after 5 days (but doesn't have to). Once CRSP includes them, funds tracking them have to follow suit.

Trzebs

For that reason, VOO is a slightly safer option than VTI. VTI tracks the CRSP which announced changes to their inclusion criteria to benefit SpaceX. VOO tracks the S&P500 which has not announced plans to change its inclusion criteria. However there is a proposal to do so. The ramifications would be changing the inclusion timeline from 12 months to 6. Still shitty that they're considering it at all, but it's better than reducing it to only 15 days. DFUS basically is the same as VOO/VTI and it is not changing its inclusion criteria. 

spetzn4tz

This is wrong. Were it to maintain its valuation it will be about 0.5% of spy by the times its eligible. The bigger issue is CRSP inclusion.

dvdmovie1

There have already been hyped up names around AI drug discovery like RXRX; a name that I said a while ago that I thought was a short and wish I would have. "$CRSP, $NTLA, and $BEAM" All Ark-y names that have generally not traded that well over the last 5 years or so. I like investing in biotech, but don't own any of these. " $ILMN is building the infrastructure behind the industry," I'd rather own TMO than ILMN but life science has continued to be awful post-covid given overcapacity and other issues. I think AI would be particularly useful in terms of things like medical imaging - not long those names but that hasn't worked out well yet either - GEHC and the rest of medtech have had a lousy year. I'd like healthcare to be a more meaningful beneficiary of AI but I have yet to see the kind of meaningful progress I'd like. Most of it has been hype with little to show for it (rxrx)

Emotional-Power-7242

Only Nasdaq is artificially inflating the float. CRSP (VTI, VT, etc) got rid of their rule requiring 10% float to be included in index but is still going to do normal float adjustment.

phybere

Probably anything that tracks NASDAQ or CRSP. Maybe others? Some pretty vanilla funds like vanguards large cap ETF VV track CRSP who have updated the rules to allow for inclusion after 5 days.

cranberrie_sauce

[https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/spacex-ipo-could-hit-popular-101500534.html?guccounter=1](https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/spacex-ipo-could-hit-popular-101500534.html?guccounter=1) nope. This isn't about QQQ. CRSP changed its rules specifically so a company with only \~5% public float could qualify for inclusion in CRSP indexes after five trading days. Those are the indexes that power Vanguard's VTI and many retirement accounts. That's a lot different than "tech investors knowingly bought QQQ.

Axe_Raider

pretend we have a useful SEC at the moment. i know, but pretend. what is it supposed to do about CRSP deciding to change its rules of how stocks are included in the index it publishes?