Category: Acciones

Most companies today communicate regularly with investors. But 90% fail to connect investor relations (IR) with overall business strategy. * This means that the vast majority of firms today are missing valuable opportunities to strengthen credibility and influence valuation. Make the most of your communications by following the five IR best practices

A strong IR strategy connects business goals to hard data and the key signals investors care about. According to Nasdaq’s 2025 Global Issuer Pulse, issuers report that investors now expect more context around strategy so they can better assess credibility and long-term potential.

What Is Investor Relations and Why Does It Matter?

Investor relations is the strategic bridge between a company’s executive leadership and its investment community. However, its impact on a business extends far beyond these core areas.

Effective IR helps companies:

• Shape narrative and perception around long-term growth potential: IR helps investors understand why the company’s choices position it for sustainable growth.
• Align intrinsic values with market valuations: IR shares internal thinking around paths to profitability with the market to reduce the disconnect between actual value and share price.
• Build support among long-term institutional and retail investors to reduce share price volatility: Consistent, transparent reporting attracts fundamentals-driven investors who stabilize trading dynamics and support resilience during market drawdowns.
• Strengthen management credibility and brand trust: Clear, consistent messaging reinforces investor confidence in the brand and its management team.
• Prepare the organization for capital events, like an initial public offering (IPO): Companies that establish strong IR practices early tend to see more informed investor engagement and stronger demand in the book-building phase.

The key insight is that investor relations is a strategic leadership function. It helps investors understand why the company is positioned to grow and helps internal leadership understand how the market is interpreting its strategic decisions.

Top Investor Relations Best Practices

Aligning releases around the following five core functions may help companies accomplish more with each market communication.

1. Position IR as a Strategic Leadership Function

Traditional models of investor relations treat communication as a simple output of finance. But investors today expect more clarity on strategic thinking. Nasdaq’s Global Issuer Pulse reports that 61% of buy-side investors want clearer links between strategy, KPIs, and quarterly results.

This often requires several process changes:

• Reporting through senior leadership: A KPMG survey found that 65% of CFOs and 51% of CEOs are significantly involved in IR today. Executive involvement makes sure the market hears the same priorities and framing internal leaders use when steering the business.
• Building cross-functional partnerships: Collaborating across finance, corporate development, legal, sustainability, and communications will provide a more well-rounded picture of your company’s narrative.  
• Preparing messaging for capital events: Whether an IPO or secondary offering, event-based communication helps to shape how investors interpret the opportunity at critical junctures. Targeted, event-based outreach helps to strengthen investor relationships.

For example, Wendy’s 2025 Investor Day was led by its CEO, CFO, and heads of strategy. More than reporting raw numbers, the leadership group framed a multi-year roadmap linking strategic priorities to measurable KPIs.

The company did more than just say it was going to focus on digital acceleration and international expansion. It gave the market clear metrics to measure its progress toward those goals. Communicating milestone timing and near-term investment targets in this way provides long-term, intrinsic investors with assurances that you’re continuing to execute on longer-term goals.

Measuring IR’s Strategic Impact

High-performing IR teams measure their contributions the same as other strategic functions, quantifying impact on valuation, market understanding, and other internal goals:

ROI metrics for IR programs: Teams often track cost per meaningful investor engagement, incremental improvements in shareholder quality, and relative stock performance during volatility.

KPIs that link IR activity to business outcomes: Teams measure shifts in analyst model accuracy and long-term holder accumulation trends before and after IR releases to evaluate perception and the level of alignment between guidance and actual performance.

Leading companies go one step further: The highest-performing IR teams also measure results through perception studies, sentiment analytics, message retention, and post-event capital flows.

2. Target Long-Term Intrinsic Investors

Focus on publishing IR updates designed around the interests of long-term investors more than short-term traders. That means shaping messaging for investors who understand the company’s strategy and business model. For example, targeting investors who appreciate your growth strategy instead of pushing for a faster pace than you can sustainably deliver.

Consider prioritizing funds that support long-term value creation, as these investors are often willing to accept temporary setbacks in the service of long-term progress. Nasdaq’s 2025 Global Issuer Pulse reports that 58% of issuers have seen increased investor focus on cash flow and margin expansion. These are clear signals that fundamentals remain a top priority for the market.

In practical terms, this means:

• Using earnings calls to reinforce the strategic process instead of only focusing on immediate results. That could mean highlighting more of the actions you took to protect your current market position, even if they didn’t have large impacts on your bottom line.
• Educating investors on leading indicators instead of lagging metrics. For example, you might focus on the favorable tailwinds coming in the next year before talking about last year’s results. Data from Nasdaq’s IR Pulse Survey Issuer survey shows that 71% of investors ask more questions about forward-looking KPIs.
• Tailoring messaging to investors who value fundamentals and are less reactive to noise in the market. That could mean spending less time discussing trending topics and more on reinforcing the long-term value proposition your business offers.

A key objective for IR teams is to align company’s share price to its intrinsic value. Opting to push for the highest price possible can shift IR function to focus on capturing momentum over stable growth. That volatility can damage a brand’s long-term reputation with investors.

For example, when a team prioritizes short-term metrics over long-term indicators, the stock will often behave unpredictably. Coupled with short-term IR guidance, this can make long-horizon funds question whether management is executing a disciplined strategy or just chasing a higher share price. Over time, such concerns can lead to reduced analyst confidence and lower-quality ownership, making it more difficult to raise capital and navigate downturns.

This is why IR teams should prioritize fundamental-focused metrics like customer retention, pipeline quality, renewal rates, and cash flow durability. This focus helps to attract the kind of long-term investors a company needs to maintain momentum through multiple cycles.

3. Communicate Transparently and Predictably

When companies communicate inconsistently or surprise the market with sudden changes, the consequences can be severe. Institutional investors may walk away from funding rounds, analysts may downgrade ratings, and the company’s share price will often suffer.

Consistent communication reduces uncertainty, which supports a more stable share price. To achieve effective communications, consider maintaining:

• A regular communication rhythm, sharing updates after earnings
• Balanced messaging that explains both progress and challenges
• Clarity around performance expectations and forward-looking guidance
• Representation from multiple members of leadership to show alignment behind the CEO

Communications should do more than highlight the positive aspects of company performance. Long-term investors are often okay with holding shares through challenges as long as they understand why they happened and what the company is doing to move forward through them

Designing a reusable IR template can streamline consistency in messaging to promote long-term predictability for investors.  

Build your templates by mapping out the key questions long-term investors ask on an outline. For example, your template should cover questions like “What is management’s strategy?” and “How is execution progressing?” This helps long-term investors evaluate progress quickly and strengthens confidence in leadership.

4. Integrate Technology Into IR Workflows

Technology has become essential to modern IR strategy. Key uses include:

• Preparing for earnings
• Automated disclosure management systems
• Predictive analytics for investor behavior
• Blockchain-based disclosure systems to promote transparency

Nasdaq’s Annual IR Pulse Report Issuer survey found that 72% of IR teams increased their use of analytics tools in the past year. Many are using purpose-built platforms such as Nasdaq IR Insight® to centralize workflows, gather insights, and deepen investor engagement.

One key component is analytics and data visualization tools. Clearly visualized data shows IR teams how investor reactions to quarterly performance, macro trends, and guidance change over time. Raw data is easier to process when presented visually, enabling faster decision-making for teams. It can also be useful for long-term investors who want clear overviews of how KPIs are progressing or how execution aligns with strategy.

Modern platforms also use embedded AI to surface patterns that may be challenging to detect manually. For example, AI could flag emerging investor segments and sentiment shifts so you can tailor your guidance to current trends.

By investing in a dedicated investor relations customer management (CRM) platform, you can build and maintain a single source of institutional knowledge to maintain consistency as leadership changes.

A purpose-built CRM can also log every investor interaction so you can plan outreach cadences on an investor-by-investor basis. That’s why 89% of business leaders today call personalization invaluable to their success.*

5. Embed ESG and Crisis Planning Into IR Strategy

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) expectations have changed the modern IR landscape. Regulations like the Securities Exchange Act and Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) require stronger transparency around governance and internal controls.

Many investors today want a deeper understanding of how an organization manages its environmental impact, governance, and long-term resilience. In Nasdaq’s Annual IR Pulse Report Issuer survey, 63% of companies said investors asked more ESG-related questions in the last 12 months.

Clear ESG communication improves risk visibility and competitive positioning. Practically, your goals should include:

• Aligning ESG metrics with strategic outcomes
• Articulating progress towards goals over time
• Defining how you measure goals and balance near-term performance with long-term responsibility
• Implementing measurable ESG communication strategies that tie initiatives to KPIs that investors can track
• Addressing diverse stakeholder information needs with tiered disclosures

It’s also helpful to plan out messaging frameworks and communication strategies in advance of different potential crises. Prepared messaging helps maintain investor confidence during periods of uncertainty.

Already Trust Nasdaq for Data? Now Unlock the Strategic Insights Behind It

If team already relies on Nasdaq data, the next step is unlocking the deeper context behind it. Nasdaq IR Insight offers direct access to exchange-level, real-time market intelligence paired with AI-driven analytics and an integrated CRM.

The combination helps IR teams interpret moments as they come to understand the “why” behind investor behavior.

Plus, with access to deep market intelligence, you may be able to shape perception proactively to strengthen ongoing shareholder alignment. Give IR teams the data and strategic context it needs now to stay competitive and become a true driver of long-term investor confidence.  

Learn how high-level IR teams combine technology with strategy to outperform in Nasdaq’s 7th Annual Global IR Issuer Pulse Report.

 

Footnotes

*Source: Bain & Company, “Investor Relations Strategy,” https://www.bain.com/consulting-services/strategy/investor-relations-strategy/

*Source: Statista, “Personalized Marketing,” https://www.statista.com/topics/4481/personalized-marketing/

This Week

For a short week, it wasn’t short on news!

Today, the Supreme Court ruled against using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to enact tariffs, specifically the “reciprocal” country-specific tariffs and the fentanyl tariffs on China, Mexico, and Canada, which raised an estimated $175 billion in revenue (half of all tariff revenue since the start of 2025).

Shortly thereafter, President Trump announced a 10% global tariff on top of “our normal tariffs” via Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to enact tariffs to address “large and serious United States balance-of-payment deficits.” They can only be imposed for up to 150 days and cannot exceed 15%. President Trump also said that they will begin investigations under Section 301 to eventually enact longer-term tariffs. We’ll have to wait on more details to get a clearer picture.

But that’s not all! We also got:

• Q4 GDP growth much weaker than expected due to government shutdown: Q4 real GDP grew just +1.4% on an annualized basis – half consensus expectations. But, the Federal government shutdown took 1% off growth (and that should largely reverse in Q1), while domestic demand grew at a solid +2.4% pace.
• Headline PCE inflation up to 2.9% YOY: Unlike CPI, PCE inflation is still rising (partly because housing has a much smaller weight in PCE), and was pushed up by food and core goods.
• January Fed minutes show openness to hike: With “some signs of stabilization” in the labor market and inflation still above target, “several” participants were open to describing future rate decisions as “two-sided,” meaning a cut or a hike.

And after all that, the Nasdaq-100® is up +1% this week, and 10-year Treasury yields are up just a few basis points to nearly 4.1%.

Next Week

Here are the top events I’m watching next week:

• Tuesday: State of the Union
• Wednesday: NVDA earnings
• Thursday: Jobless claims
• Friday: Produce price inflation (Jan.)

An amazing milestone was passed in 2025: It was the year when off-exchange market share increased above 50%.

But looking at price discovery during the day, lit trading is even lower.

Interestingly, we find that the market is the darkest in the middle of the day.

Lit price discovery falls to 30% of continuous trading

A lot of price discovery happens during the day – while traders are working on large orders searching for liquidity – and economic news is fresh.

We have previously noted that off-exchange market share is now over 50%. But if we look at the tape during the day, we see that the percentage of lit trades is even lower. In fact, less than a third of all volume intraday comes from lit venues at the National Best Bid and Offer (NBBO).

Chart 1: In continuous trading, when price discovery happens, dark is even higher

Interestingly, the light grey shade shows the proportion of trades on exchange but at prices that are not on the SIP. That includes a lot of midpoints, but also odd lots. It also shows that even investors who like exchanges for their ability to attract liquidity, still like to stay “hidden.” 

It’s darkest in the middle of the day

We can also take a deeper dive to see if the level of hidden trading changes throughout the day.

The data shows that traders rely more on lit quotes at the start and end of each day. It is, therefore, the darkest in the middle of the day.

Chart 2: The middle of the day has the lowest proportion of on exchange trades 

Interestingly, though, the proportion of “lit” trades (exchange trades at the NBBO) is less variable – starting at around 30% in the morning and not really increasing until closer to 3:30 p.m. Eastern time. That’s likely when the certainty of hitting a lit quote becomes a more important factor for traders as they near the end of the day.

What about that “tipping point?”

Academics have for years thought that the 50% off-exchange represents a “tipping point,” where the NBBO no longer rewards price setters and price discovery degrades. The reason the NBBO would degrade is explained by cream skimming research. 

• The most profitable spread-crossing trades are siphoned to off-exchange venues (by offering price improvement, PFOF or tiering).
• Concentrating less profitable spread-crossing trades in fair access (lit) markets.
• Because price setters in lit markets need to actually capture spread, they will need the spreads to widen to account for the lower rate of spread capture on the NBBO.

If we listen to academics, the trend we’ve seen over the last 20 years is now unlikely to reverse. 

By implication, too, the NBBO is now likely wider than it should be.

What this all means

This is part of a 20-year trend, not a short-term trading pattern. So, it’s most likely due to economics.

We have previously highlighted how exchange orders are competing on an unlevel the playing field. Off-exchange venues are able to segment and sometimes trade off-tick, making it easier to capture spread from less toxic flow, while exchanges must offer access to everyone. This, in turn, makes providing a quote on exchange less attractive, which leads to wider quotes and, as a result, creates a self-fulfilling cycle of increasing off-exchange trading.

We have even found that these economic differences allow less-toxic venues to charge more for trading.

In addition, SIP accounting can actually subsidize off-exchange venues.

It’s hard to expect lit trading to improve against headwinds like this.

The risk is this all leads to less competitive quotes, then higher trading costs and, ultimately, worse asset allocation and higher costs of capital for companies. That would result in less financial security for U.S. households, and perhaps even lower economic growth and liquidity in U.S. markets.

There is a reason U.S. markets are the envy of the world, but we can’t take any of it for granted.

Shiyun Song, Research Principal, contributed to this article. 

This Week

This week featured two heavyweights of economic data: jobs and inflation (and another artificial intelligence-related selloff on Thursday).

Starting with the negatives… annual revisions erased over 400,000 job gains last year, meaning the economy added just 181,000 for the whole year (down from +1.5 million in 2024) – the least in a non-recession year since 2003!

However, the more recent data were better. The economy added 130,000 jobs in January – double expectations – and the unemployment rate fell to 4.3% from 4.4%. Plus, the private sector has started to stabilize, gaining 172,000 in January, compared to losing 20,000 in August.

The CPI report was also positive. Headline inflation fell to 2.4% YoY from 2.7% and core inflation eased to 2.5% from 2.6%, as the contribution to inflation fell for all four major categories: core goods, core services, food, and energy.

Between cooling inflation and an improving but still soft jobs market, markets now expect nearly 65 basis points (bp) in Fed cuts this year, up from 55bp a week ago.

For equities, that wasn’t enough to offset Thursday’s selloff, leaving the Nasdaq-100® down 1% for the week, while 10-year Treasury yields are down about 15bp to 4.05%!

Next Week

Here are the top events I’m watching next week:

• Wednesday: Industrial Production (Jan.)
• Thursday: Initial Claims, WMT earnings
• Friday: PCE Inflation and Spending (Dec.), Real GDP (Q4), Flash PMI (Feb.)

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is openly looking at changing the order protection rule (OPR, Rule 611).

We recently looked at how often markets are actually locked and crossed. It was rare, and extremely short lived.

Today, we look at how often trades print to the Securities Information Processor (SIP) at a price that looks like a trade-through. It’s also rare, and perhaps mostly due to the time it takes to route trades to the SIP.

What are we talking about? 

When you look at the SIP, you do often see trades arrive at the tape, at old (stale) prices, after the National Best Bid and Offer (NBBO) has changed. 

In theory, if the NBBO is “protected,” we should never see a trade happen at a worse price than the NBBO. So, what is going on?

Chart 1: In many markets, trades hit the consolidated tape after the BBO changes

The chart above, from a study in Europe, shows what we are talking about. In that study, the trades were found to mostly be latency arbitrage opportunities, where orders hitting the dark pool were routed using faster microwave links.

However, this could also happen because of the physics of routing orders – in short, the midpoint fill was “traveling” to the consolidated tape as the BBO updated. That’s one reason why physics makes a pre-trade consolidated tape impossible.

Only a fraction of midpoints print after the NBBO has changed 

The first question we ask is how often does this actually happen in the U.S.?

And the answer is almost never. 

As the data in Chart 2 shows, around 19.4% of all off-exchange trades occur at midpoint. However, only 0.5% are at “stale” midpoints – where the NBBO has already changed – and almost none of those are reported outside the NBBO.

Chart 2: Midpoint trades are almost 18% of all off exchange trades, only 0.04% print through the NBBO 

Did these trades occur before dark pool saw the NBBO change?

The next question is how “stale” are these trade prints?

If we track all the Trade Reporting Facility prints that occur at the “old” NBBO mid, after the NBBO has changed, we see almost all arrive within 2,500 microseconds (2.5 milliseconds). To put this in perspective, this is all pretty fast (we blink in 250 milliseconds), but it’s not faster than the speed of light.

Chart 3: Distribution of “stale” mid-point prints from off-exchange venues 

The fact that there is elevated activity right after a quote changes seems to confirm that dark pool midpoints get actively probed for liquidity at the same time as the lit quote is removed.

You may remember our prior study where we showed how trades speed between venues (and the SIP) and found that trades and quote updates acted, traveled and reacted in a flurry – over about 1 millisecond. So, it is quite possible that some of the “stale prints” actually traded before the dark pool knew the NBBO had changed.

Consider this example: 

Looking only at Nasdaq listings, which means the trades have to report to SIP at Carteret:

• We assume that most dark pool trades happen at data centers in Secaucus (Form ATS-Ns show where this is true).
• We also assume all orders and SIP messages travel by fiber (which is most conservative).
• Finally, for simplicity in this thought experiment, we assume the dark pools are using SIP feeds not direct feeds for their NBBO updates (although we know that’s not true for all, this does create the longest reaction window).

Once the SIP NBBO updates, it will take around 143 microseconds by fiber for the NBBO update to arrive at the dark pool in Secaucus to update the midpoint price in the dark pool. 

If a trade happened right before that, it would still take another 143 microseconds by fiber for that “late” trade to arrive at the SIP in Carteret. We also need to consider some compute times — as a guide, the SIP takes around 15 microseconds to process quote changes.

That represents a round-trip time of roughly 300 microseconds, which we shade blue in the chart above. We can see that the window includes a lot of late-arriving trades, but not nearly all.

Stale trades happen, whether there is latency arb is harder to tell

In reality, all of these prints are a lot faster than the amount of time dark pools are allowed to wait to post a trade (which is 10 seconds). 

But it’s clear some of the reports are a long time after the 300 microseconds that the NBBO update should take to travel to the dark pool, process and return. 

What we can see is stale trade-prints happen, even with OPR in place. Whether there is latency arbitrage occurring is harder to tell. 

This Week

This was one of those weeks we’ve seen on occasion in the last year (and especially since late October) where markets worry about artificial intelligence (AI). There were two flavors of concern:

1. AI as disruptor: Anthropic’s new AI legal tool drove a selloff (especially) in software (including private markets) over fears AI will disrupt their businesses.
2. AI is EXPENSIVE: GOOG announced plans to double its capex in 2026 to $175-$185 billion, while AMZN plans to boost capex in 2026 nearly 60% to $200 billion, renewing worries about the potential profitability of AI.

Aside from AI, there were also three negative(ish) labor market reports (all with caveats):

1. ADP showed the private sector added fewer jobs (+22,000) than expected in January (+45,000), but revised monthly gains have improved since last spring and stabilized at low levels.
2. Initial claims rose (231,000) much more than expected (212,000), but this may be partly due to winter storm Fern and unusually cold weather.
3. JOLTS job openings came in 700,000 lower than expected, but this doesn’t match private data like Indeed, and the hiring rate rose, while the layoff rate was steady at very low levels.

So, after a bounce today, software stocks are down 9% for the week, the Nasdaq-100® is down 2% (blue line), and 10-year Treasury yields are down ~5bp to 4.2% (black line).

Next Week

Here are 5 events I’m watching next week:

1. January nonfarm jobs report on Wednesday
2. January CPI report on Friday
3. December retail sales on Tuesday
4. Q4 employment cost index on Tuesday
5. January NFIB small business optimism on Tuesday

In 2025, the initial public offering (IPO) market continued to rebound from the 2022 and 2023 slump. For the second year in a row, markets saw more IPOs, more special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), and more capital raised at IPO. 

Looking at the data, we see IPOs really gained strength toward the end of the year — IPOs raised more money, and SPACs rebounded to almost 2020 levels.

2025 IPOs increase for third straight year

Using data from Jay Ritter, a well-known IPO academic with a long history of activity, we look at historic IPOs of U.S. companies. 

Ritters’ data excludes exchanged-traded funds. It also allows us to separate companies that had an IPO price under $5, SPACs, banks, unit offers, partnerships, trusts, and REITS in a separate “other” category (below). 

Chart 1: IPOs continued to rise in 2025

In 2025, we saw a total of 354 U.S. equity market IPOs — that’s 136 more than in 2024 and 206 more than in 2023, but still well below 2021’s high. Although operating company IPOs are still not back to levels seen in the latter half of the 2010s. 

2025 IPOs raised $44 billion

Capital raising continued to increase in 2025, with (non-SPAC) IPOs raising a total of $44 billion; $14 billion more than in 2024 and $24 billion more than in 2023. Capital raised in 2025 even surpassed the total raised between 2015 – 2018. 

Notably, 81% of new IPOs chose Nasdaq for their listings home, raising a total of $25 billion on IPO day. 

Chart 2: Capital raised in IPOs increases

Industrials and Tech companies dominated 2025 IPOs 

With the AI boom, it’s no surprise that Information Technology (IT) companies made up over 25% of 2025 (non-SPAC) IPOs. Together, IT and Industrials companies were over half of 2025 IPOs. 

Notable names include: 

• CoreWeave, Inc. (CRWV), which raised $1.5 billion and reached a day-one market cap of $18.6 billion.
• SailPoint, Inc. (SAIL), which raised $1.38 billion and reached a day-one market cap of $12.2 billion.
• Firefly Aerospace, Inc. (FLY), which raised $998.6 million and reached a day-one market cap of $8.5 billion. 

But the winner for most raised at IPO in 2025 was health care company Medline, Inc. (MDLN), raising $6.26 billion in their IPO. 

Chart 3: Tech and Industrials made up over half of 2025 IPOs 

Day-one returns continued their positive trend  

Day-one return, or IPO pop, measures the return on the stock from the institutional placement price to close on the stock’s first day of trading. 

In 2025, we saw a slight improvement to 2024 one-day IPO return – and back closer to long term averages. Specifically: 

• Median IPO pop was 13%, and average IPO pop was 22%.
• 71% of companies had a positive pop.

Chart 4: IPO first-day returns distribution

Good IPO pop faded more than normal

We also see that the longer 2025 IPOs were listed, the more their “pop” faded (the green line in Chart 5). 

Despite the fade in median 2025 IPO’s performance – longer-term median returns have held up better than for 2024 (pink line) and 2023 (dark blue line) IPOs. Interestingly, the 6-month average return is the second-best at 36%; however, this excludes IPOs after June since they aren’t old enough yet. 

Chart 5: 2025 IPOs performed better in the long run than the last three years

Unicorns were less special in 2025 

The data in Chart 6 shows returns through end of year 2025 by day-one market cap. The bubbles are sized by how much capital the company raised.

In 2024, we saw a strong size-bias to returns – where unicorns were much more likely to have positive returns than smaller companies. In 2025, that trend mostly disappeared. Through year-end, the: 

• Cap-weighted return, using year-end market cap, was 6.5%, while
• The overall median return was 1.29%.

Chart 6: 2025 IPOs returns through end of year

Looking at the IPOs by sector (circle colors): 

• Health Care stocks fared the best with an average return of 39% through Dec. 31, 2025.
• Consumer Staples also fared well, but recall Chart 3, there was only one Consumer Staples IPO, SFD. Through Dec. 31, 2025, the lone sector IPO returned 13%.
• The Energy sector fared the worst with an average drop of 38.5% through Dec. 31, 2025.
• Information Technology had the most IPOs with the largest cumulative raise ($11.2 billion). Although, by year end, the sector’s IPOs had an average return of -33%.

Looking across the horizontal axis, we also see different demand for capital across sectors:

• The two largest IPOs were MDLN, reaching a day-one market cap of $54 billion, and CRWV, with a day-one market cap of $18.6 billion (although both raised a fraction of that value).
• The Health Care sector wasn’t far behind IT, raising $10.6 billion at IPO between 34 companies.
• Industrials raised only $5 billion, even though the sector had 53 IPOs, showing Industrials companies have about half the demand for capital compared to Health Care companies.

SPAC recovery: by count and size

We saw a recovery in SPACs, too, reaching their third-highest level in our records — right behind 2020 and 2021 — with 88 more SPACs listed than in 2024, and only 101 less SPACs than in 2020.

Right now, 120 of the 2025 SPACs are still actively looking for targets (orange), while 24 have already announced a deal (purple). 

Remember, SPACs typically have about two years to find a deal, although they can seek shareholder approval to extend the SPAC’s life (usually up to another year). After that they are required to liquidate. To that end, looking at prior vintages of SPACs:

• All 2024 SPACs are also still active – at year end, eight had completed a deal (green), 26 have announced, and 22 are still active.
• Only two 2023 SPACS are still active, and two have liquidated (black), which makes sense as we enter 2026.
• 50% of SPACs from the peak listing year of 2021 were liquidated. 

Chart 7: New SPAC listings almost tripled in 2025 compared to 2024

In 2025, many SPACs raised more capital than each of the prior three years. The median SPAC raised $200 million (grey box, Chart 8), only slightly less than $220 million in 2021, and mostly in line with 2016 – 2020.

Chart 8: More 2025 SPACS raised more capital than 2023 and 2024 

SPAC prices stay around $10 

Active SPACs that are still looking for a deal range in price range from $9.94 to $13.03 with an average price of $10.47 and a median price of $10.28. 

SPACs that have announced a deal are slightly higher in price, but that’s mostly because of the strong performance of WLACU. The data in Chart 9 shows only a few SPACs that have announced a deal are trading above $11. 

Chart 9: Active SPAC prices still held at around $10

2025 was a strong IPO market 

Last year was one of the best years for IPOs (outside of 2020-2021) in the last decade. We saw more IPOs, more capital raised, more SPACs, and better day one returns in 2025.

Our IPO pulse predicts a continued strong IPO market into 2026. Counting just the “centicorns” – companies valued at $100 billion or more – the list of potential IPOs includes SpaceX (which recently acquired xAI), OpenAI, ByteDance, Anthropic AI, Databricks, and Stripe. Thanks largely to AI investments, Bloomberg suggests companies worth a combined $3 trillion could IPO in 2026.

In short, 2026 could be a historic year for IPOs! 

Executive Summary

• U.S. equities sustain positive momentum alongside improving market breadth
• Small cap, Midcap, and Value leadership persists
• Parabolic gains in precious metals unwind sharply
• Inflation, employment, and consumer confidence data remain mixed
• S&P 500 companies on pace for fifth consecutive quarter of double-digit EPS growth
• Nasdaq and the ongoing evolution of capital markets

U.S. equity markets began 2026 with a constructive tone, extending the positive momentum established through the back half of last year. January performance was characterized by broad participation, improving breadth, and continued leadership from economically sensitive and value‑oriented segments of the market. The overall market backdrop remained supportive, underpinned by resilient growth expectations, stable financial conditions, and strong corporate balance sheets.

Unlike late‑cycle environments marked by narrow leadership, January’s advance was notable for its diversity of winners across market capitalizations and sectors. Equal‑weight indices outperformed their cap‑weighted counterparts, small‑ and mid‑capitalization stocks delivered solid absolute gains, and cyclical sectors generally outpaced defensives. This rotation reflected investor confidence in the durability of economic activity and an ongoing recalibration toward balance following last year’s growth‑heavy leadership.

From a macro perspective, markets continued to benefit from a favorable mix of easing inflation pressures, steady labor market conditions, and a Federal Reserve firmly in wait‑and‑see mode. Interest rates remained well‑contained, credit conditions stayed accommodative, and liquidity remained ample, allowing risk assets to absorb policy and geopolitical headlines without material disruption. Against this backdrop, January served less as a turning point and more as a confirmation of trends already in motion: broader participation, selective rotation, and an emphasis on earnings durability rather than pure multiple expansion.

Looking ahead, the early‑year setup appears constructive. While volatility is likely to ebb and flow as markets digest incoming economic data and policy developments, the underlying foundation entering 2026 reflects healthy internal market dynamics and a growing opportunity set across styles, sectors, and capitalizations.

January gains were led by small‑ and mid‑capitalization indices, with the Russell 2000 and S&P MidCap 400 outperforming large‑cap benchmarks. Equal‑weight versions of the S&P 500 and Nasdaq‑100 also outpaced their cap‑weighted counterparts, reinforcing the theme of improving breadth. Large‑cap indices posted more modest gains but remained firmly positive on a multi‑month basis, reflecting consolidation after strong advances in 2025 rather than any deterioration in trend. The dispersion between equal‑weight and cap‑weighted indices suggests investors are increasingly willing to look beyond the largest constituents, favoring broader earnings participation and valuation normalization.

Style performance in January continued the rotation that began late last year. Value outperformed growth across both large‑ and small‑capitalization universes, with particularly strong gains in small‑cap value. This leadership reflects a combination of factors, including sensitivity to domestic economic momentum, easing financial conditions, and renewed interest in segments that lagged during periods of more concentrated growth leadership. Growth stocks, while lagging on a relative basis, maintained positive longer‑term performance trends, particularly within large caps. The January dynamic appears less about abandoning growth and more about broadening the opportunity set, as investors rebalance toward a more diversified style exposure entering the new year.

Sector Performance

At the sector level, January performance was led by economically sensitive areas, including Energy, Materials, Industrials, and Communication Services. Strength across these groups reflected improving confidence in global demand, capital spending, and cyclical activity, as well as favorable pricing dynamics in select commodity‑linked industries.

Defensive sectors delivered more muted returns, consistent with a risk‑supportive environment and a rotation toward growth‑sensitive exposures. Importantly, sector dispersion remained orderly, with no broad signs of stress or capitulation. Instead, performance reflected healthy rotation within an overall constructive market trend, rather than a flight away from any single area of the market.

Small‑cap sector performance further underscored January’s pro‑cyclical tone. Energy, Materials, and Industrials led the advance, supported by improving domestic demand expectations and a stabilization in financing conditions. Financials also posted solid gains, benefiting from improved operating leverage and a steeper yield environment since late 2025.

More defensive and growth‑oriented small‑cap sectors lagged on a relative basis, though most remained positive over the broader three‑month and year‑to‑date horizons. The overall takeaway from small‑cap performance is one of re‑engagement, as investors selectively re‑entered areas of the market that had been more sensitive to macro uncertainty earlier in the cycle.

From a technical standpoint, although the initial breakout to new highs occurred in September, January marked the first month in which the Russell 2000 exhibited meaningful follow‑through beyond the prior cycle high at the 2,486 resistance level.

Rates, Oil, Precious Metals, and the Dollar

January’s cross‑asset backdrop remained supportive of risk assets. Interest rates were largely range‑bound, reinforcing financial stability and helping sustain equity valuations. Commodity performance was mixed but constructive, with strength in energy‑ and materials‑linked markets aligning with improved cyclical sentiment.  After declining five consecutive months to close out 2025, WTI crude rebounded 13.6% in January.  And while crude has moved above its 50-d and 200-d simple moving averages, the longer-term, multi-year trend of lower highs remains intact.  

The greenback (DXY) declined for the third consecutive month (-1.4%) while temporarily breaking down below a seven-month support level ($96.38) to a four-year low.  A tactical relief rally has since set-in, working off oversold momentum readings (daily RSI 23); however, the longer trend appears lower.

Precious metals continued to attract interest as portfolio diversifiers, reflecting ongoing demand for real assets alongside risk exposure. At their January high, gold and silver were +29.5% and 69.8%, respectively. However, during the last session of the month, gold and silver declined 12.8% and 36.1%, respectively, at their intra-session lows before closing the day with declines of 9% and 26.4%, respectively. For silver it was the single worst one-day decline since at least 1950. The previous record decline since 1950 was -22% intraday, or -17% on a closing basis, both of which took place on Oct. 10, 2008. Macro news and a reversal of crowded trades contributed to the steep declines. Despite the steep drawdown, gold and silver closed out the month +13.3% and +18.9%, respectively.

Economic Data

January’s U.S. economic data painted a mixed but market‑relevant picture, with inflation signals becoming less uniform and growth indicators diverging across sectors. Headline CPI for December was fully in line with expectations, while core CPI came in slightly cooler on a month‑over‑month basis, reinforcing the view that consumer inflation pressures continue to moderate at the margin. However, that message was complicated by a significant upside surprise in producer prices. Core PPI and final demand PPI both materially exceeded consensus on a monthly basis, with year‑over‑year measures also running hotter than expected, underscoring persistent pipeline cost pressures that remain inconsistent with a smooth disinflation narrative.

Labor market data leaned softer overall, though not decisively so. Nonfarm payroll growth undershot expectations in December, with both headline and private payrolls coming in below consensus, while prior months saw modest downward revisions. Despite slower job gains, the unemployment rate declined modestly, and wage growth remained firm, with average hourly earnings running above expectations on a year‑over‑year basis. High‑frequency labor indicators, including jobless claims, remained historically low and relatively stable throughout the month, suggesting labor market cooling remains gradual rather than abrupt.

Activity data showed notable bifurcation. Manufacturing indicators remained contractionary, with ISM Manufacturing slipping further below 50, while services activity surprised sharply to the upside, as ISM Services posted one of the strongest beats of the month. Hard data was more constructive, with industrial production and capacity utilization exceeding expectations, supporting the view that underlying economic momentum remains resilient despite softer survey‑based manufacturing signals. Third‑quarter GDP was revised slightly higher, confirming robust growth momentum exiting last year, while price components within GDP remained elevated but stable.

Consumer demand data held up reasonably well. Retail sales exceeded expectations across headline and ex‑auto measures, pointing to continued spending resilience, even as consumer confidence surveys were mixed. The Conference Board confidence index disappointed relative to expectations, while the University of Michigan sentiment readings improved modestly, reflecting ongoing tension between household balance‑sheet strength and inflation sensitivity.

Taken together, January’s data complicated the near‑term macro narrative for markets. While headline inflation and employment growth showed signs of moderation, firm wage growth, strong services activity, and upside surprises in producer prices suggest that underlying inflation pressures have not fully dissipated. For capital markets, this combination reinforced rate sensitivity to incremental data and supported continued volatility in front‑end policy expectations rather than a clear shift toward an imminent easing cycle.

Corporate Earnings

Fourth‑quarter earnings season has gotten off to a solid start, with early reporters reinforcing a broadly constructive profit backdrop for U.S. equities. With roughly one‑third of S&P 500 companies having reported, 75% delivered EPS beats and 65% have exceeded revenue expectations, resulting in aggregate earnings coming in 9.1% above estimates, well above historical averages. Importantly, the magnitude of earnings surprises has more than offset the slightly below‑average beat rate, lifting the blended S&P 500 earnings growth rate to 11.9% year‑over‑year, which—if sustained—would mark a fifth consecutive quarter of double‑digit earnings growth. Results have been driven primarily by Information Technology, Industrials, and Communication Services, where outsized upside surprises from several mega‑cap and cyclical leaders have meaningfully boosted index‑level growth.

Margins have also been a notable positive. The S&P 500 is on pace to report a net profit margin of 13.2%, According to FactSet, this is the highest level on record underscoring strong operating leverage despite ongoing cost and wage pressures. While revenue beats have been more modest in magnitude, top‑line growth remains healthy at 8.2% year‑over‑year, representing the second‑strongest revenue growth rate since mid‑2022 and extending the index’s streak of revenue expansion to 21 consecutive quarters. Looking ahead, early guidance trends are encouraging, with positive EPS guidance for Q1 2026 outpacing negative guidance, and analysts continue to forecast double‑digit earnings growth through 2026, supporting the durability of the earnings cycle even as valuation multiples remain elevated.

Nasdaq and the Ongoing Evolution of Capital Markets

Beyond market performance, January provided continued evidence of structural transformation within U.S. capital markets, with Nasdaq playing a central role in several forward-looking initiatives. The exchange remains actively engaged in market advocacy and innovation efforts designed to enhance accessibility, liquidity, and resilience for listed companies and investors alike.

Key areas of focus include the exploration of extended and potentially 23-hour trading models, which aim to better align U.S. markets with global participation and evolving investor behavior. In parallel, Nasdaq continues to engage in discussions around digital asset infrastructure, tokenization, and the modernization of market plumbing to support future issuance and trading models.

In January, Nasdaq alerted market participants to an upcoming market structure update related to fractional share trading, which will go into effect on Feb. 23. While fractional trading itself is not new, the change formalizes how such trades are reported and reflected in consolidated market data. Historically, trades involving fractional share quantities were required to be reported as whole shares, limiting transparency around true trade size and volume. Under the updated framework, trades in NMS stocks with fractional components will now be reported with greater precision, improving the accuracy of last‑sale data and consolidated volume statistics. From a market perspective, the update is largely technical in nature and is not expected to alter trading behavior, but it represents an important modernization of equity market infrastructure as fractional and small‑dollar trading continues to grow.

Nasdaq’s efforts in these areas reflect a broader commitment to supporting listed companies through policy engagement, regulatory dialogue, and infrastructure investment. As capital markets evolve, these initiatives are intended to provide issuers with greater flexibility, investors with improved access, and the ecosystem as a whole with enhanced efficiency and transparency. Over time, developments such as fractionalization, expanded trading hours, and digital settlement frameworks may further reshape how capital is raised, allocated, and traded.

Summary

While near‑term conditions warrant a degree of caution, particularly given that February has historically been a seasonally weaker period for the S&P 500, the broader “message of the market” does not suggest a meaningful deterioration in the intermediate or long‑term trend. Recent price action and momentum signals point more toward consolidation than the start of a sustained downturn. As a result, periods of volatility or pullbacks in the weeks ahead should be viewed within the context of an ongoing, constructive backdrop. While patience may be required in the near term, the weight of the evidence continues to favor maintaining a constructive market outlook over a longer‑term horizon.

---

The information contained herein is provided for informational and educational purposes only, and nothing contained herein should be construed as investment advice, either on behalf of a particular security or an overall investment strategy. All information contained herein is obtained by Nasdaq from sources believed by Nasdaq to be accurate and reliable. However, all information is provided “as is” without warranty of any kind. ADVICE FROM SECURITIES PROFESSIONAL IS STRONGLY ADVISED.

This Week

It was a big week for fourth-quarter earnings, but also for the Federal Reserve – even in a week where it kept rates unchanged (as expected).

First, the Fed upgraded its assessment of the economy, seeing economic growth as “solid,” instead of “moderate,” and recognized “some signs of stabilization” in the labor market.

Second, President Trump announced he’ll nominate former Fed governor Kevin Warsh for Fed Chair. While he was seen as a “hawk” (concerned about inflation) as a Fed governor, he’s argued recently that AI-driven productivity and deregulation are a path to lower inflation and rates.

We also had mega-cap earnings, with META (beat), MSFT (beat), and TSLA (beat) all reporting. Despite the beats across the board, META gained +10% on stronger revenue projections, while MSFT lost 10% on slower revenue projections, even as both boosted AI spending.

And after all that, the Nasdaq-100® (blue line) and 10-year Treasury yield (black line) both ended the week roughly flat.

(Also, I have to note that there’s a chance of a partial government shutdown tomorrow, but it may be .)

Next Week

Here are the major events I’m watching next week:

1. January nonfarm payrolls on Friday

2a. GOOG Q4 earnings on Wednesday

2b. AMZN Q4 earnings on Thursday

3. December JOLTS on Tuesday

4. ISM Manufacturing PMI (Monday) & ISM Services PMI (Wednesday)

Given how important public companies are to retirement savings and U.S. household finances, the reduction in listed companies and the increasing age of IPOs is something we should try to correct.

Two common complaints (from companies) are that it is: 

1. Too expensive and complicated to be public — partly because of all the reporting they need to do.
2. More challenging to execute long-term growth strategies with quarterly reporting and stock reactions.  

Nasdaq has long advocated for reduced reporting obligations — either with a bigger focus on materiality or via less frequent reporting. Recently, President Donald Trump and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Paul Atkins have both supported moving U.S. companies from quarterly reporting to semi-annual. This move would also align U.S. public company obligations with places like the European Union and the U.K.

More importantly, as we show today, it could save companies from preparing hundreds of pages of disclosures every year. 

Company accounting is critical to efficient valuations

Public disclosure of accounting data is a key factor helping investors value stocks. That, in turn, helps ensure stock markets add to efficient asset allocation, growing the economy.

U.S.-listed companies are required to make certain disclosures on SEC forms. There are different rules depending on their status as a Domestic Issuer or a Foreign Private Issuer (FPI). For example:

• 10-K, 20-F, and 40-F: Annual reports, including audited financial statements.
• 10-Q: Quarterly reports, including unaudited financial statements.
• 8-K or 6-K: Ad-hoc regarding material (or current) events, or SEC-required disclosures, and semi-annual reports (for FPIs).

Table 1: SEC reporting requirements

What’s in these SEC filings?

There is a lot of overlap in the content of most of the regular filings, although the annual filings are most comprehensive, as Table 2 below shows:

Table 2: What is required in each SEC report

While annual reports are clearly the most comprehensive, 10-Qs and 6-Ks can also include some of the items marked with a red “X” if there is a material development for the company triggering disclosure. In addition, foreign companies need to include anything they are required to disclose in their home country in their SEC filings. 

How large are all these filings?

To understand exactly how much work each filing entails, we counted the number of pages in the most recent annual and quarterly (for U.S. companies) or semi-annual report for all the Nasdaq-100® constituents. 

As the data in Chart 1 shows: 

• 20-Fs are typically the longest of all the filings (although typically this includes copy-pasted data and visualizations from their home country filings).
• 10-Ks are around twice as long as 10-Qs.
• 6-Ks are the shortest reports.

Although 10-Qs and semi-annual report 6-Ks are similar in length, U.S. companies are preparing 10-Qs three times a year (versus just once for foreign private issuers).

Chart 1: Number of pages in SEC reports for Nasdaq-100® constituents   

Interestingly, the circle size shows the market cap of each company. Visually, the data seems to indicate that shorter 10-K and 10-Q filings are often lodged by the largest companies. 

Elimination of the additional two quarterly reports for domestic issuers would save an average of 116 pages of filings per company – that’s around 10,000 less pages for the Nasdaq-100® alone.

What is an FPI?

At a basic level, foreign private issuers (FPIs) are companies that are incorporated abroad but list their stock in the U.S. However, the rules also look at the proportion of their shares held by U.S. residents, as well as the location of the company’s executives, directors, assets, and headquarters.  The actual tests for an FPI are found in Securities Act  Rule 405 and Exchange Act  Rule 3b-4.

In contrast to domestic issuers, FPIs file SEC reports semi-annually (twice a year). FPIs are also able to:

• Use existing reports and presentations that were used for home country filings.
• Reduce disclosure for executive compensation, market risk and financial position.
• Use international accounting standards (IFRS) instead of U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).

FPIs are also exempt from some reporting, including insider transactions (although recently enacted U.S. law has instructed the SEC to require FPIs to file beneficial ownership reports), human capital management resources and objectives, listing exchange corporate governance rules, SEC proxy solicitation rules and Regulation FD (e.g., FPIs can disclose nonpublic information selectively).

What is an 8-K?

One thing we haven’t talked about much here is material (and current) event reporting. Domestic issuers must report material events or corporate changes using SEC Form 8-K. 

FPIs use SEC Form 6-K (the same form used for their semi-annual reports) to report current events.  

Both 8-Ks and ad-hoc 6-Ks typically cover events like leadership changes, mergers, auditor changes, securities changes, bankruptcies, financial results/earnings, or revised financial statements, among numerous other events.  

Although we don’t analyze the length or frequency of material event reports in this study, a quick review of EDGAR for a few stocks indicates:

• It’s not unusual to see 10 material event reports filed in a year.
• These reports can range in length from very short (one sentence) to very long, such as the length of a “Super 8-K,” which are used when a de-SPAC merger happens.

Annual cost of public filings estimated at $9 billion each year

In addition to staff time spent preparing reports and disclosures, the costs of SEC filings include audit fees, consulting fees and maintaining systems and technology. 

Experts estimate that total annual SEC compliance costs, including audit costs, range from below $0.5 million for small companies to $5+ million for large companies – averaging roughly $2.3 million per company. For all U.S. companies, that adds to roughly $9 billion a year.

If moving U.S. companies from quarterly to semi-annual reporting reduced these costs by half, using a PE multiple of just 10, that could add roughly $45 billion to U.S. market valuations. That would, in turn, reduce the costs of capital and make being public more attractive.

Most other countries are already semi-annual

Interestingly, less than 20 countries require quarterly reporting. In the past 25 years, numerous countries, including the U.K., all the European Union countries and Australia, have moved to semi-annual reporting.  

Moving to semi-annual reporting for U.S. companies would also not only align U.S. public company obligations with other countries, but also help alleviate short-termism and reduce reporting costs and costs of capital. That, in turn, should make public companies more attractive to issuers and investors.