Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 578

The butterfly effect, index funds, and the rise of mega caps

What goes up must come down was the mantra of small-cap investors for decades. Yet, over the last 10 to 20 years the largest companies have become larger and larger, outperforming small caps in the process. Some new research indicates that at least in part, this might not have been the result of mega caps being operationally superior to small caps but may be due to a butterfly effect triggered by index fund flows.

Index funds have long been prime suspects in the search for reasons why large companies have grown larger over time and why the US stock market, for example, is entirely dominated by a few mega-cap tech companies. I have always been suspicious of this argument because if you buy an index tracker, you buy each stock in the index in proportion to their market cap, so investors moving from active to passive funds should not influence the relative market cap of the stocks in an index.

Yes, index investors don’t correct mispricing of stocks because they don’t care about valuations, but the stock market remains dominated by active investors, and the market share of index trackers is in my view way too small to explain why megacap stocks trade at much higher valuations than most of the rest of the S&P 500, for example.

But when I read a paper by Hao Jiang, Dimitri Vayanos, and Lu Zheng I was surprised to see how flows into index funds create a butterfly effect among large-cap stocks.

For the uninitiated, the butterfly effect describes the observation that in a complex nonlinear system, even the tiniest changes in starting conditions can lead to large changes in the result. This was commonly described as a butterfly flapping its wings creating a tornado somewhere else.

The butterfly effect was discovered by meteorologist Edward Lorenz who tried to run computer forecasts of the weather. Below is a visualisation of the simple computer model he ran in 1972. The blue and yellow cones are virtually in the same spot at the start of the simulation. They differ only by 0.0001 units horizontally. For the first 23 seconds, the blue and yellow trajectories are the same, but then they start to diverge wildly. The centre cone in the chart below shows the position after 30 seconds.

The butterfly effect in the Lorenz attractor

Source: XaoBits, Wikimedia Commons

In their research, Jiang et al. demonstrated something like a butterfly effect in US stock markets. Whenever index funds put money to work in the market, idiosyncratic volatility for larger stocks increased more than for small stocks, and excess returns over cash increased as well.

But index flows into the US stock market are tiny. Over the last 25 years, they average 0.05% of US stock market cap per quarter with a standard deviation of 0.09% per quarter. Annualised, we are talking about 0.2% of market cap shifting from active to passive management per year.

They show that while the impact on the relative market cap of the largest stocks in the US is a tiny 0.3% per quarter, this accumulates over time. After 25 years these tiny shifts in market cap between larger and smaller stocks amount to large-cap stocks being 30.25% larger than they would have been without the rise of index investments!

But why would the market cap of large stocks in an index react more than the market cap of smaller stocks? This is where Valentin Haddad, Paul Hübner, and Erik Loualiche provide a fascinating answer. They measure the price elasticity of stocks to changes in flows for each stock in the US. They find that the larger a company, the more inelastic demand becomes. But when demand is inelastic it means that a small increase in demand leads to a larger increase in price (and hence market cap).

The reason why demand becomes more inelastic for larger stocks is simply because almost every investor – whether active or passive – needs to own the largest companies in a market. If you own smaller companies, you can easily sell them when they become too expensive and in your view overvalued.

If you are an active fund manager, nobody will blame you for underperformance just because you didn’t own Etsy shares. But try not owning NVIDIA or Apple shares and then underperform the market and see how your investors will react… Hence, even active investors are forced to hold at least some NVIDIA and Apple shares no matter how expensive they are. And that tiny difference in demand creates a huge benefit for the largest stocks over 25 years.

Elasticity of demand declines for larger stocks

Source: Haddad et al. (2024)

 

Joachim Klement is an investment strategist based in London. This article contains the opinion of the author. As such, it should not be construed as investment advice, nor do the opinions expressed necessarily reflect the views of the author’s employer. Republished with permission from Klement on Investing.

 

  •   18 September 2024
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Index versus active – our readers reprise

Index versus active? Nobel Prize professors can’t agree

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Retirement income expectations hit new highs

Younger Australians think they’ll need $100k a year in retirement - nearly double what current retirees spend. Expectations are rising fast, but are they realistic or just another case of lifestyle inflation?

Four best-ever charts for every adviser and investor

In any year since 1875, if you'd invested in the ASX, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods. It's just one of the must-have stats that all investors should know.

Why super returns may be heading lower

Five mega trends point to risks of a more inflation prone and lower growth environment. This, along with rich market valuations, should constrain medium term superannuation returns to around 5% per annum.

Preparing for aged care

Whether for yourself or a family member, it’s never too early to start thinking about aged care. This looks at the best ways to plan ahead, as well as the changes coming to aged care from November 1 this year.

Our experts on Jim Chalmers' super tax backdown

Labor has caved to pressure on key parts of the Division 296 tax, though also added some important nuances. Here are six experts’ views on the changes and what they mean for you.        

Why I dislike dividend stocks

If you need income then buying dividend stocks makes perfect sense. But if you don’t then it makes little sense because it’s likely to limit building real wealth. Here’s what you should do instead.

Latest Updates

Investment strategies

LICs vs ETFs – which perform best?

With investor sentiment shifting and ETFs surging ahead, we pit Australia’s biggest LICs against their ETF rivals to see which delivers better returns over the short and long term. The results are revealing.

Retirement

The growing debt burden of retiring Australians

More Australians are retiring with larger mortgages and less super. This paper explores how unlocking housing wealth can help ease the nation’s growing retirement cashflow crunch.

The ASX is full of broken blue chips

Investing in the ASX 20 or 200 requires vigilance. Blue chips aren’t immune to failure, and the old belief that you can simply hold them forever is outdated. 

Shares

Buying Guzman y Gomez, and not just for the burritos

Adding high-quality compounders at attractive valuations is difficult in an efficient market. However, during the volatile FY25 reporting season, an opportunity arose to increase a position in Mexican fast-food chain GYG.

Investment strategies

Factor investing and how to use ETFs to your advantage

Factor-based ETFs are bridging the gap between active and passive investing, giving investors low-cost access to proven drivers of long-term returns such as quality, value, momentum and dividend yield. 

Strategy

Engineers vs lawyers: the US-China divide that will shape this century

In Breakneck, Dan Wang contrasts China’s “engineering state” with America’s “lawyerly society,” showing how these mindsets drive innovation, dysfunction, and reshape global power amid rising rivalry. 

Retirement

18 rules for ageing well

The rules to age successfully include, 'the unexamined life lasts longer', 'change no more than one-eighth of your life at a time', 'nobody is thinking about you', and 'pursue virtue but don’t sweat it'.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.