Archived article
Please note that tax, investment, pension and ISA rules can change and the information and any views contained in this article may now be inaccurate.
Nasdaq rally: is this a brave new dawn or a big bear trap?

It was the worst-performing major equity index in 2022 and, so far, it has been the best in 2023. Is the Nasdaq back? It is tempting to think so, especially after the meaty rally in stocks such as Meta Platforms (META:NDQ) and Microsoft (MSFT:NDQ) following their first-quarter results. In addition, the US (and probably global) bellwether for technology stocks is up by 18% from its autumn 2022 low and, arguably, on the cusp of a new bull market.
Equally, the Nasdaq is still trading 24% below its 2021 peak Some would say that a new bull run does not begin until the old peak is eclipsed and exceeded by 20%, and the Nasdaq is actually trading some 24% below is 2021 peak, so it is just as easy to argue that tech stocks are still mired in a bear market.
Been there, done that
Anyone who remembers the Nasdaq’s collapse of 2000-2003, after the dizzying bull market of 1998 to 2000, may be inclined to proceed with caution.
It is highly unusual for the leaders in the last bull market to be the leaders in the next one (the bear market usually ends when all hope has been abandoned).
The S&P 500 has gained $2.4 trillion in market cap so far in 2023 and just six stocks – Meta, Amazon (AMZN:NASDAQ), Apple (AAPL:NASDAQ), Netflix (NFLX:NASDAQ), Alphabet (GOOG:NASDAQ) and Microsoft – have generated $1.6 trillion, or two thirds, of those gains. It is open to debate how (un)healthy it is to be relying so heavily on such a select list of names, no matter how formidable their business models may look today.
The Nasdaq Composite managed nine rallies during the 2000-2003 bear market, which ranged from 8% to 45% and 11 to 105 days in duration. The aggregate gains across those nine romps came to 4,886 points but the index still fell by 3,935 points, or 78%, from peak to trough. It then took the Nasdaq until May 2015 to get back to its March 2000 peak.
That last stat is particularly telling, not least because it is possible to argue the Nasdaq bull market this time around was even more egregious than the one of 2000 to 2003, given the unfettered enthusiasm for meme stocks, Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs), initial public offerings, cryptocurrencies and a lot more besides.
Different this time
The run from the Nasdaq’s autumn low is 195 days old, so the good news is it already has more longevity than any of the 2000-2003 rallies. That may encourage investors to think that Nasdaq’s last pullback is more akin to the short, sharp bear markets of 1978, 1980, 1987, 1998 and 2020 rather than the soul-crushing slumps of 1973-74, 2000-02 and 2007-09 which saw the index lose 60%, 78% and 56% of its value, respectively.
There have been 12 bear markets in the Nasdaq since 1971.
On average they have lasted 340 days and shaved 38% off the index’s value. The current slump is now 525 days old and has cut 24% off
the benchmark.
Sceptics will therefore assert that there could still be worse to come, especially as the worst downturns have come after the most rampant advances and the index’s addition of 9,196 points in just 606 days in its last bull run does look like a classic blow-off top.
But tech is rallying. This may be in response to the sharp share price falls if 2022, which mean valuations are now more attractive, or fears of a recession and the search for relatively reliable earnings and cashflows or hopes for interest rate cuts later in the year. If the world returns to the low-interest-rate, low-growth, low-inflation mire which characterised the 2010s and early 2020s then you can see why tech could excel again, because such an environment places a premium on any firm that is capable of producing secular growth.
Equally, if a 40-year era of cheap energy, cheap money, cheap labour and cheap goods is over, and higher inflation and higher rates are with us to stay, then it is more difficult to argue that has worked before will work again, simply because the environment will be so different.
That backdrop would seem better suited to ‘jam-today’ cyclical stocks which could start to offer nominal rates of growth that mean there is no need to pay a premium valuation for perceived, ‘jam-tomorrow,’ long-term growth stocks. It could also persuade investors to lessen exposure to equities in favour of commodities and ‘real stuff,’ which by and large outperformed ‘paper’ assets in the 1970s.
Important information:
These articles are provided by Shares magazine which is published by AJ Bell Media, a part of AJ Bell. Shares is not written by AJ Bell.
Shares is provided for your general information and use and is not a personal recommendation to invest. It is not intended to be relied upon by you in making or not making any investment decisions. The investments referred to in these articles will not be suitable for all investors. If in doubt please seek appropriate independent financial advice.
Investors acting on the information in these articles do so at their own risk and AJ Bell Media and its staff do not accept liability for losses suffered by investors as a result of their investment decisions.
Issue contents
Case study
Feature
Great Ideas
News
- Cloud computing, not artificial intelligence, is what’s really driving big tech earnings
- HSBC shares leap as profits triple and firm announces $2 billion buyback
- Meta Platforms’ shares continue to soar on AI hype and cost cuts
- Shares in Ocado are down 44% in 12 months as the company closes key facility
- Could the sustained rise in food prices become a political issue?