I remember reading this headline and then going and looking at the XMAG index[0].
YTD: +15.5%
1 year: +9%
Since inception (Oct 2024): +14%
Comparing that with S&P500
YTD: +16.7%
1 year: +13%
Since XMAG inception: +18%
The article should start with such a comparison but it just seems like a lot of text with very little numerical comparison, which makes it not very useful to conclude what the case is.
The MSN link on the post doesn't have the charts the original WaPo article [0] contains, which provide just such a comparison, though over a longer period (from 2019), showing 132% vs 1057%. (No idea if that is right or more/less meaningful, just pointing out it's missed off this link.)
In previous years, I could have excused such shoddy journalism. In the age of LLMs that can do the work for you, it’s inexcusable that the author didn’t pick 3-5 sample strong economies from the past to judge today by.
Different than when the railroads dominated the market, or the industrials dominance in the 20s and 30s, or the nifty fifty, or the communication dominance in the late 90s?
Does the S&P 493 reveal a different economy or does it reveal that the author published an article based on feelings instead of research?
I remember reading this headline and then going and looking at the XMAG index[0].
YTD: +15.5%
1 year: +9%
Since inception (Oct 2024): +14%
Comparing that with S&P500
YTD: +16.7%
1 year: +13%
Since XMAG inception: +18%
The article should start with such a comparison but it just seems like a lot of text with very little numerical comparison, which makes it not very useful to conclude what the case is.
0: https://www.defianceetfs.com/xmag/
The MSN link on the post doesn't have the charts the original WaPo article [0] contains, which provide just such a comparison, though over a longer period (from 2019), showing 132% vs 1057%. (No idea if that is right or more/less meaningful, just pointing out it's missed off this link.)
[0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/11/24/sp500-sto...
Correct! Backtest and compare ratios to common indexes!
real url https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/11/24/sp500-sto...
Yes, it would be good if the URL could be changed to this as the MSN link misses out all the charts, which are rather crucial.
All words, not one chart or graph.
Why the fuck is TSLA ever included in this list?
In previous years, I could have excused such shoddy journalism. In the age of LLMs that can do the work for you, it’s inexcusable that the author didn’t pick 3-5 sample strong economies from the past to judge today by.
Different than when the railroads dominated the market, or the industrials dominance in the 20s and 30s, or the nifty fifty, or the communication dominance in the late 90s?
Does the S&P 493 reveal a different economy or does it reveal that the author published an article based on feelings instead of research?
All those ended pretty badly, right?