Some rule changes barely make a sound… until your money is already inside the system. The Nasdaq-100, the index that tracks the 100 largest non-financial companies listed on Nasdaq, created a fast-track path for massive newly public companies to enter the index if they rank among the 40 largest by market capitalization: evaluation on the seventh trading day and possible inclusion after just 15 days. This is not a technical detail. It is a highway for passive money to rush in before the market has fully discovered the company’s real price.
They did not call it “permission to buy loss-making companies.” They called it Fast Entry. But the practical effect could be just as explosive: if a giant company enters the index, the funds that replicate it do not sit down to debate its business model, corporate governance, or ability to generate profits. They buy. Because their mandate is not to think. It is to copy.
And then comes the SpaceX case. In documents filed with the SEC, the company acknowledged a history of net losses, including losses of approximately US$4.937 billion in 2025 and US$4.276 billion in the first quarter of 2026 alone, while also warning that it may not achieve or sustain profitability in the future. Even so, its offering documents showed a price of US$135 per share, a potential raise of US$75 billion, and an intention to list on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX.
The uncomfortable question is this: what happens when a company that has not yet proven sustainable profitability is pushed into portfolios that manage the savings of millions of people? We are not just talking about traders buying hype. We are talking about ETFs, pension funds, institutional mandates, sovereign wealth funds, and passive investment vehicles that, if they follow the benchmark, are pulled in by the mechanics of the index.
The alarm has already reached the public sector. Treasurers and financial authorities from Maryland, Illinois, and Oregon sent a letter to Nasdaq stating that they represent more than 1.5 million workers and retirees. They warned that the Nasdaq-100 is tracked by more than US$662 billion in ETFs and mutual funds, with an estimated total exposure of US$1.4 trillion when structured notes, insurance products, and derivatives are included. They also stated that when SpaceX enters under the fast-entry rule, every fund tracking the index would be forced to buy its shares.
That is the critical point: the system turns a questionable decision into an automatic purchase. If there is limited float, little price history, and a massive valuation, passive flows can act like fuel. First comes the narrative. Then the rule gets adjusted. Then the company enters the index. Finally, the money appears from people who may not even know they are taking that bet.
The comparison with S&P is revealing. S&P Dow Jones kept key filters unchanged: for the S&P Composite 1500, companies must show positive GAAP earnings in the most recent quarter and over the sum of the last four quarters. It also maintains that IPOs must trade for at least 12 months before being considered. In other words, while one part of the market still preserves maturity filters, another is accelerating the entry of mega-companies before the dust has even settled.
For Notbank users, this story is not just about SpaceX or Elon Musk. It is about who decides where your money ends up. If the rules of the traditional financial system can be changed on the fly to channel capital into assets with questionable profitability, then the conversation around crypto, stablecoins, and self-custody stops being a trend. It becomes a conversation about control, transparency, and choice.
