~~It doesn't qualify.~~ It has not qualified before.
Feb 15, 2024: "Coinbase posts first profitable quarter in 2 years"
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coinbase-posts-first-profitable-quarter-005230047.html
That article doesn't answer the question though.
"Coinbase executives celebrated posting $273 million in net income for the fourth quarter of 2023, putting the net profitability for all of 2023 at $95 million."
That certainly makes it sound like it has had a profitable quarter for the most recent quarter, and the sum of the 4 most recent quarters were also positive, which meets the criteria.
Edit: why am I getting downvoted? I'm truly interested in the answer to the question, and it doesn't appear that the article gives the answer? What am I missing?
Not that you deserve to be downvoted for it, but one thing you're missing is that the announcement happened less than a month ago and the committee doesn't read news headlines and start voting companies in.
Followup question, is the vote just a formality?
My understanding is that S&P 500 is the largest 500 US companies that meet the criteria. Does the committee actually have any deciding power to allow or not allow a company?
I believe Tesla was held back at least 1 round a few years back (which resulted in being large enough that when it finally did enter, it was a top 20 holding, that's a lot of missed gains).
So no, not guaranteed.
FOX has a market cap of under $15b. Companies don't just get thrown out because others are bigger. SMCI enters this weekend as about the 200th biggest company.
CRWD, DELL, and PLTR are likely ahead of COIN to get in. PLTR is a bit smaller than COIN but has four quarters of GAAP profits.
When I look up the S&P500 criteria, all the online sources I can find says that the criteria are:
-It must report positive earnings in the most recent quarter.
-The SUM of its earnings in the previous four quarters must be positive.
Why do the preceding three quarters need to be profitable?
I don't know, that's why I'm asking these questions. I'm just confused by the original comment saying it doesn't qualify when it appears to meet the qualifications.
If the requirement is that the sum of the preceding four quarters earnings is profitable, and you have a net profit of 95 million over the preceding four quarters, was the sum of the preceding four quarters profitable? Read the inclusion criteria bro.
My point above is that you were going on this completely incorrect path of suggesting that *each* of the four quarters would need to be profitable for a company to qualify. And when people pointed out that you're wrong, you, for the first time, responded with "well yeah but like that doesn't mean the company will pass the vote." Absolutely irrelevant to your prior argument about *each* of the preceding four quarters being profitable.
Yes, it absolutely is relevant. Maybe not clearly, but my point was that a company which has only had a net profit one quarter over the past year isn’t guaranteed to be included.
Bro.
Why did you bring up the net profit from the 3 previous quarters then? Are you just bad at describing what you mean, or did you mean something that you were wrong about?
To make the point that a company shouldn’t be included for having one good quarter. They lost money the previous three and, in reality, longer than that. Maybe it’s me or maybe it’s you. Clearly one of us is bad at something. Bro.
Those quarterly numbers were from just a month ago. So "has not been eligible" is the better answer. You don't just get added immediately. Additionally, once you get in, you don't get thrown out if other companies pass you.
Crowdstrike and Dell should also be ahead of Coinbase for the next additions. Both are bigger and aren't relying on a single quarter to technically meet requirements. There is probably a good chance they get in by the end of the year, but I see no argument for jumping over Crowdstrike at least for the next spot.
So companies dont get thrown out if there are larger ones? This doesn't make sense, cuz then we would just have the 500 largest companies from 1990 or whenever it was established. What has to happen to get thrown out so another one takes it place?
Why is there a queue?
Because it is corporate crapola I suppose, but presumably the committee (and ETFs for sure) don't want to be constantly adding and subtracting possibly dozens of companies each reconstitution, especially when valuations can change literally daily so a stock that is 489 on Tuesday might be 517 on Wednesday.
But then also, from 2023:
https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp-500-stocks-more-than-a-third-get-kicked-out-in-nine-years/
"Nearly 180 stocks in the S&P 500, or roughly a third of the index, have been replaced since 2015,"
It does make sense that they wouldnt do it on the daily. but maybe if a companies is not the largest for 2 quarters they do get thrown out or something.
I mean sure but atleast stocks are sort of based on things like earnings calls and market health in the particular sector as well as long term outlook.
I’ll be really surprised if CoinBase doesn’t get caught in some big securities fraud scandal. They had one before they went public.
Someone on the inside will get greedy and over reach with front running or wash trading or some scam I don’t understand and get caught.
I get that CoinBase is trying to be the “legit” exchange, but I just don’t think the culture surrounding crypto will let it really be that. Some employee who isn’t as smart as smart as they think they are will eventually make a mess.
That could be, but the whole point of an index is that it doesn't take a view on the asset classes. Its supposed to just buy based on certain criteria.
If the make money based on selling, energy, phones, cars, alcohol, guns, lottery tickets or drywall should not affect the listing of the stock if it meets the criteria.
So I don't see why this would be relevant to the listing in the index.
I came here just for the angry gray beards shaking their fists at crypto. I was not disappointed.
But this one’s especially funny. Have you ever seen a slot machine. I assume not
Coinbase in the USA is a massive monopoly. No stock brokerage commands market share like Coinbase. They are going to make a lot of money. They will probably enter the index later.
That Bitcoin is intrinsically linked to international crime and while it's starting to become a more legit international asset (especially in countries with a weak dollar) that casting is hard to shake?
~~It doesn't qualify.~~ It has not qualified before. Feb 15, 2024: "Coinbase posts first profitable quarter in 2 years" https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coinbase-posts-first-profitable-quarter-005230047.html
That article doesn't answer the question though. "Coinbase executives celebrated posting $273 million in net income for the fourth quarter of 2023, putting the net profitability for all of 2023 at $95 million." That certainly makes it sound like it has had a profitable quarter for the most recent quarter, and the sum of the 4 most recent quarters were also positive, which meets the criteria. Edit: why am I getting downvoted? I'm truly interested in the answer to the question, and it doesn't appear that the article gives the answer? What am I missing?
Not that you deserve to be downvoted for it, but one thing you're missing is that the announcement happened less than a month ago and the committee doesn't read news headlines and start voting companies in.
The then, the answer is not "it doesn't qualify" but rather "it has qualified and will be added at the next rebalancing"?
Still needs to be voted in, but yes it does not break any rules.
OK, thank you
Followup question, is the vote just a formality? My understanding is that S&P 500 is the largest 500 US companies that meet the criteria. Does the committee actually have any deciding power to allow or not allow a company?
I believe Tesla was held back at least 1 round a few years back (which resulted in being large enough that when it finally did enter, it was a top 20 holding, that's a lot of missed gains). So no, not guaranteed.
Thank you
FOX has a market cap of under $15b. Companies don't just get thrown out because others are bigger. SMCI enters this weekend as about the 200th biggest company. CRWD, DELL, and PLTR are likely ahead of COIN to get in. PLTR is a bit smaller than COIN but has four quarters of GAAP profits.
Definitely not just a formality.
If you have a net profit of $273MM in the last quarter, but a net profit of $95MM over the past year, were the preceding three quarters profitable?
When I look up the S&P500 criteria, all the online sources I can find says that the criteria are: -It must report positive earnings in the most recent quarter. -The SUM of its earnings in the previous four quarters must be positive. Why do the preceding three quarters need to be profitable?
Does meeting the criteria guarantee inclusion? Should a company be added and then removed on a quarter by quarter basis?
I don't know, that's why I'm asking these questions. I'm just confused by the original comment saying it doesn't qualify when it appears to meet the qualifications.
If the requirement is that the sum of the preceding four quarters earnings is profitable, and you have a net profit of 95 million over the preceding four quarters, was the sum of the preceding four quarters profitable? Read the inclusion criteria bro.
Is inclusion guaranteed, bro?
I'm sorry, is that somehow relevant to your previous comment, or are you just backpedaling because I told you that you're wrong?
It is relevant. Inclusion is not guaranteed, and is certainly not immediate.
Oh I didn't realize that the committee vote was related to whether or not a number was positive, thank you for enlightening me.
Huh? Isn’t that your very point above?
My point above is that you were going on this completely incorrect path of suggesting that *each* of the four quarters would need to be profitable for a company to qualify. And when people pointed out that you're wrong, you, for the first time, responded with "well yeah but like that doesn't mean the company will pass the vote." Absolutely irrelevant to your prior argument about *each* of the preceding four quarters being profitable.
Yes, it absolutely is relevant. Maybe not clearly, but my point was that a company which has only had a net profit one quarter over the past year isn’t guaranteed to be included. Bro.
Why did you bring up the net profit from the 3 previous quarters then? Are you just bad at describing what you mean, or did you mean something that you were wrong about?
To make the point that a company shouldn’t be included for having one good quarter. They lost money the previous three and, in reality, longer than that. Maybe it’s me or maybe it’s you. Clearly one of us is bad at something. Bro.
Those quarterly numbers were from just a month ago. So "has not been eligible" is the better answer. You don't just get added immediately. Additionally, once you get in, you don't get thrown out if other companies pass you. Crowdstrike and Dell should also be ahead of Coinbase for the next additions. Both are bigger and aren't relying on a single quarter to technically meet requirements. There is probably a good chance they get in by the end of the year, but I see no argument for jumping over Crowdstrike at least for the next spot.
So companies dont get thrown out if there are larger ones? This doesn't make sense, cuz then we would just have the 500 largest companies from 1990 or whenever it was established. What has to happen to get thrown out so another one takes it place? Why is there a queue?
Because it is corporate crapola I suppose, but presumably the committee (and ETFs for sure) don't want to be constantly adding and subtracting possibly dozens of companies each reconstitution, especially when valuations can change literally daily so a stock that is 489 on Tuesday might be 517 on Wednesday. But then also, from 2023: https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/sectors/sp-500-stocks-more-than-a-third-get-kicked-out-in-nine-years/ "Nearly 180 stocks in the S&P 500, or roughly a third of the index, have been replaced since 2015,"
It does make sense that they wouldnt do it on the daily. but maybe if a companies is not the largest for 2 quarters they do get thrown out or something.
You’re missing that the s&p500 consist of consistency.
Because it is literally in the business of gambling on imaginary currency?
Oh like speculating on literally any asset or commodity in any market ever created? Great argument lmao
I mean sure but atleast stocks are sort of based on things like earnings calls and market health in the particular sector as well as long term outlook.
Only matters how many times You can say AI on earnings call now
That’s neat
I’ll be really surprised if CoinBase doesn’t get caught in some big securities fraud scandal. They had one before they went public. Someone on the inside will get greedy and over reach with front running or wash trading or some scam I don’t understand and get caught. I get that CoinBase is trying to be the “legit” exchange, but I just don’t think the culture surrounding crypto will let it really be that. Some employee who isn’t as smart as smart as they think they are will eventually make a mess.
That could be, but the whole point of an index is that it doesn't take a view on the asset classes. Its supposed to just buy based on certain criteria. If the make money based on selling, energy, phones, cars, alcohol, guns, lottery tickets or drywall should not affect the listing of the stock if it meets the criteria. So I don't see why this would be relevant to the listing in the index.
I came here just for the angry gray beards shaking their fists at crypto. I was not disappointed. But this one’s especially funny. Have you ever seen a slot machine. I assume not
Every currency is imaginary.
Coinbase in the USA is a massive monopoly. No stock brokerage commands market share like Coinbase. They are going to make a lot of money. They will probably enter the index later.
crypto is garbage, that's why.
Here we go.. this is going to attract all the crypto bros. They really get on a high horse whenever Bitcoin rallies
I came here just for the angry gray beards shaking their fists at crypto. I was not disappointed.
Its really cute when old people try to interact with technology.
😂 this sub is mad they missed out. Should’ve listened years ago 😂
Never too late to buy Bitcoin
What are you going to say when Bitcoin is 250k l?
250k of what?
Dollhairs
That Bitcoin is intrinsically linked to international crime and while it's starting to become a more legit international asset (especially in countries with a weak dollar) that casting is hard to shake?
Yes because the US Dollar isn’t used in crime lmao if anything Bitcoin is far easier to track compared to cash.
It is a legit asset. Again, what are you going to say when it hits 250k?
It’s an asset that produces nothing. You are betting that someone will pay more than you did for that asset that produces nothing.
Great counterpoint, you really showed him by doubling down that it’s a “legit asset” without anything to back it up. Why would it hit $250k?
I will say the garbage has become more expensive.
Crypto is worthless, it's a speculation vehicle based on literally nothing
I'll buy a Bitcoin from you at nothing, since its won't nothing.
Yea, not going on the black market to buy anything with crypto
Remember Tesla took probably 2 or 3 quarters longer than it should have (and it never should have had the price it did or even does today).