How Many Stocks Are Driving the Market?
Contribution Concentration measures how concentrated the index’s last three months were: how many equally sized contributions would be as lopsided as the real ones, set against how many the index’s own weights imply. Gains and losses both count, so a large stock falling hard concentrates the move as much as a large stock rising. Below 1, a few names moved the index more than their size alone explains; above 1, the move was spread wider.
Estimated for today’s members at plain market value; the history reconstructs today’s members back to 2010. The marker is the latest window, the dashed line the window a month earlier. Spread-out movement can be broad buying or broad selling, so neither end of the track is good or bad, and it makes no forecast.
Latest read
Over the 63 sessions to October 16, 2026, half of all the movement in the estimated S&P 500 basket, gains and losses counted alike, came from 24 of 494 members; 235 rose, 259 fell, and the basket returned +2.85%. Microsoft Corp was the largest contributor in the direction of the move: 14.8% of all the movement and 50% of the basket's net gain. The movement was as concentrated as if 32 stocks had contributed equally, an equivalent count that names no particular stocks, against 48 for the weights alone: a ratio of 0.66, below the middle of its range since 2010 (39th percentile). Its 21-session average fell from 1.08 to 0.57 over the month.
Sources, methodology & freshnessDaily closes for S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 members, SPY and QQQ (TradeStation, Massive); share counts from Massive; Ken French Data Library (49 industries, CRSP market). · Daily after the close; the industry record monthly.Data as of 2026-10-16 · Open ↓Close ↑
The reading over time
Each faint point is one 63-session window; the dark line is its 21-session average. The single-window reading jumps when a large daily move by a big stock enters or leaves the window, so read the average for the trend. The thin line at 1 is the weight-based reference; the shaded band is the middle half of the average’s own history (0.60 to 0.85). Readings below 1 are the usual state, and only the band’s edges are unusual.
Who moved the index
The largest positive contributions and the largest drags over the same 63 sessions. Each contribution is the member’s starting weight times its return, and together they add up to the basket’s +2.85% (SPY +2.85%). The two shares answer different questions. Share of net is how much of the basket’s gain or loss one stock supplied, shown only when gains and losses do not nearly cancel; share of gross is how much of all the movement, gains and losses counted without sign, it accounts for, and the ratio above is built on the gross. 235 members added to the basket and 259 subtracted.
- Microsoft Corp MSFT+1.43 ptsweight 4.5% · return +31.5% · 14.8% of gross · +50% of net
- Nvidia Corp NVDA+0.40 ptsweight 7.4% · return +5.3% · 4.1% of gross · +14% of net
- Apple Inc. AAPL+0.37 ptsweight 7.2% · return +5.2% · 3.9% of gross · +13% of net
- Meta Platforms Inc. META+0.21 ptsweight 2.2% · return +9.8% · 2.2% of gross · +7% of net
- ExxonMobil XOM+0.19 ptsweight 0.9% · return +20.6% · 2.0% of gross · +7% of net
- Palantir Technologies Inc. PLTR+0.18 ptsweight 0.5% · return +38.0% · 1.9% of gross · +6% of net
- Broadcom Inc. AVGO−0.36 ptsweight 2.7% · return −13.1% · 3.7% of gross · −13% of net
- Applied Materials Inc AMAT−0.14 ptsweight 0.6% · return −22.1% · 1.5% of gross · −5% of net
- Alphabet Inc. GOOG−0.12 ptsweight 2.9% · return −4.1% · 1.3% of gross · −4% of net
- Alphabet Inc. GOOGL−0.10 ptsweight 3.1% · return −3.2% · 1.1% of gross · −4% of net
63 sessions to October 16, 2026, 494 of 503 members with a price and share count. Weights are today’s share count times the closing price at the start of the window: plain market value, without the index provider’s float adjustment. Across the record the basket’s 63-session return sits a median 0.44 points from SPY’s. The Nasdaq-100 version is rougher because the index caps its largest weights: over this window the basket returned +3.81% against QQQ’s +1.97%, so it appears only as a rough estimate.
US industries since 1926
The same measure on Ken French’s 49 US industries, weighted by market value, dividends included, every session since 1926. It has no survivorship gap, and it is the only record the study below uses. French publishes monthly, so this record ends on August 31, 2026; the stock estimate on that same day is beside it.
Over that window the largest industry contributions were pharmaceuticals (+0.90 pts) and banks (+0.72 pts), and the largest drag semiconductors and electronics (−1.19 pts).
Does it predict anything?
Two ways of counting the same history give different answers. Counting every day, the broadest tenth of industry readings, each ranked only against earlier days, was followed by a median next-quarter market return of +4.2% against +2.5% after the most concentrated tenth. Neighbouring days share most of their next quarter, though, so a few long stretches dominate that count. Counting each episode once, the medians were +1.8% and +2.4%, a difference of −0.6 points with a 95% range of −3.4 to +2.6, which cannot be told apart from chance. A 10% fall followed 25% of broad episodes and 23% of concentrated ones. The tool describes what moved the index; on this record it offers no dependable forecasting advantage.
CRSP US market with dividends. Tenths are point-in-time, each day against every earlier day once 1,000 readings exist. An episode is the first day in a tenth after 63 sessions without one. Ranges in brackets are 95% bootstrap intervals over episodes.
How this measure was chosen, and what that test can and cannot showShow the contest, its scorecard and its caveats
Three candidate measures were tested on this record under rules written down on October 17, 2026, before any result was computed; this one ran under the working name Effective Leaders. Each was regressed at month ends on four outcomes, with the market’s recent return and volatility, the share of industries above their 200-day average and the share beating the index as controls. To pass, a measure needed a t-statistic of at least 2, the same sign in 1927–1949, 1950–1989, 1990 onward, and a 1990-onward slope matching the earlier sign. Contribution Concentration passed 2 of 4 (next-quarter return and next-quarter drawdown); Hidden Strength passed 0 and Leadership Turnover passed 0.
- Next-quarter returnt +2.8 pass
- Next-year returnt +1.6 fail
- Next-quarter volatilityt −2.1 fail
- Next-quarter drawdownt +2.6 pass
- Next-quarter returnt +1.2 fail
- Next-year returnt +0.9 fail
- Next-quarter volatilityt −1.9 fail
- Next-quarter drawdownt +2.0 fail
- Next-quarter returnt +0.3 fail
- Next-year returnt +0.4 fail
- Next-quarter volatilityt −0.5 fail
- Next-quarter drawdownt +1.3 fail
- 12 comparisons were run, so one or two passes near t = 2 is roughly what chance alone produces. Requiring the same sign in every era was the guard against that.
- In 1927–1949 the passing slopes had t of +0.0 and +0.5, close to zero, so the evidence comes from 1950 onward; by era the strongest is 1990 onward (t +2.7 and +2.2).
- The 1990-onward period was part of the pass rule, and so of choosing the winner. It is not an untouched test, and no later out-of-sample record exists yet.
- The regression finds a small association that the episode count does not confirm at the extremes. Both are reported because they disagree.
- At 21 sessions the measure passed 2 of 4 outcomes and at 126 sessions 1 of 4.
- Every figure in this section is recomputed from French’s current files by the code the original test ran; the input fingerprints and the full receipt are in the data file.
Method and limits
- Effective contributors are one over the sum of squared shares of the gross contribution; the weight-based count is one over the sum of squared starting weights. The ratio of the two is the reading.
- The S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 readings are estimates: today’s members, weighted by today’s share count times each past close. The index providers’ float and capping adjustments are not applied.
- Carried back to 2010, today’s member list misses companies that were removed, so the stock history describes today’s index rather than the one that existed. It feeds no study.
- The study is on 49 industry portfolios. Concentration among industries and among stocks can behave differently, and nothing here establishes what the stock reading predicts.
Estimated for today’s members at plain market value; the history reconstructs today’s members back to 2010. The marker is the latest window, the dashed line the window a month earlier. Spread-out movement can be broad buying or broad selling, so neither end of the track is good or bad, and it makes no forecast.
How Contribution Concentration Works
- 1Split the basket's return into contributionsOver the last 63 sessions, each member's contribution is its estimated weight at the start of the window times its return. The contributions add up to the return of that estimated basket, which tracks SPY closely for the S&P 500 and only roughly tracks QQQ for the Nasdaq-100.
- 2Count the effective contributorsIf every contribution were the same size, the count would be the number of stocks. When a few stocks supply most of the move, it is close to that few. The count is one over the sum of squared shares of the gross contribution, gains and losses alike.
- 3Compare it with the index's own concentrationA cap-weighted index is concentrated before anything moves: the same formula applied to the S&P 500's weights gives far fewer stocks than the index holds. The reading is the ratio of the two. Below 1, the quarter's movement was more concentrated than the weights alone imply; above 1, more spread out.
- 4Grade it on a century of industriesThe same measure on Ken French's 49 US industries, weighted by market value, runs daily since 1926 with no survivorship gap. It was tested against two other breadth ideas under rules written down first. The page reports that test in full, including where the evidence is weak.