I think the rules are there are hard limits unless a multi-trillion dollar company IPOs with a significant absolute float, in which case tracking the "market" obviously includes said company.
We are now at the point where companies can game the system of indexing. Investors need to wake up to this fact and realize this is likely a paradigm shift.
The normal seasoning period is there for a reason. There is a massive downside to premature inclusion of a stock that is initially overvalued and then settles to a reasonable/sustainable value.
Define “massive”. SpaceX is only 1.2% of QQQ.
They are not questioning money exchange, they are questioning the "only" part, claiming this is significant.
Then they should buy a broad-market fund. The kinds in which new issues are a tiny fraction or, if it’s following something like the S&P 500, not included at all. Following the Nasdaq 100 and then complaining it has too many risky tech plays is a bit silly.
Like a Russell 1000 fund? Oh wait...
Yes. A fund that doesn’t choose what is and isn’t a good investment. Total market means total market.
If you don’t like that, the S&P 500 is bigger than those for a reason.
They did change their rules, they did it fairly specifically for spacex and it did drive inclusion in a major index fund (perhaps the biggest one).
Now me personally, as a holder of vti I am good with the change and my included exposure to spacex. Further I think mostly complaining about the inclusion/exclusion of a single name in an index _defeats the point_.
But for those decrying the shenanigans crsp and vti are the example to go with.
To the extent there is potential bullshit, it is here.