IN THIS LIST

S&P 500: America's Benchmark

Measuring Liquid Commodities through Changing Markets

Tracking High Forecast Dividend Yield in Australia: S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index

SPIVA By the Numbers: A Global Perspective

The Rebalance | The Future of Indexing On-Chain with Kaiko

Index TV - Jul 17, 2026

S&P 500: America's Benchmark

Length 7:43

Length 7:43

Cathy Clay, CEO of S&P Dow Jones Indices, and Lynn Martin, President of the NYSE Group, recently met on the trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange to discuss how the S&P 500 connects America’s past, present and future

Drawing on the index’s nearly 70-year legacy, they examine what has made the benchmark so iconic—its role in helping Americans participate in the economy, the enduring strength of the NYSE Group and S&P Dow Jones Indices partnership, and the way it continues to serve as a trusted compass for today’s markets.

[TRANSCRIPT]

Cathy Clay:

I’m here on the trading floor of the New York Stock Exchange with the President of the NYSE Group, Lynn Martin. We’re here to discuss things that are happening in the market and, of course, America’s benchmark, the S&P 500. Lynn, let me ask you a question. We’re celebrating a lot of milestones recently. We’ve just finished the 250th anniversary of our country. The Dow Jones Industrial Average turned 130 this year, if you can believe it. And, next year, the S&P 500 will turn 70. You also recently just came from the Oval Office where you were part of the announcement for the launch of the Trump Accounts. And, I’m interested to hear, how do you think about the S&P 500 as really that iconic America benchmark and its importance in America’s economic story.

Lynn Martin:

Well, Cathy, first and foremost, welcome home to the New York Stock Exchange. It’s so much fun to be with you. To answer your question, we just turned 234 years old.

Cathy Clay:

Oh my gosh. That makes us feel very young, doesn’t it? In the context of all of these birthdays.

Lynn Martin:

Agree, it makes us feel very, very young. But, to your question on the Trump Accounts, I don’t think it’s a mistake that the default contributions will go into funds that are benchmarked against the S&P 500. And, when you think about, and I talk to a lot of CEOs who have that aspiration of being one of the constituents of the S&P 500. You think about one of the greatest inventions of our generation, and that has really been the ETF industry. It has transformed the way people invest. I think it is no coincidence that alongside the ETF boom, so to speak, you have more and more households talking about investing just as part of their normal conversations around the dinner table. And, that’s because of the amazing work that you do at S&P Dow Jones Indices to properly curate the constituents, to think about what the weightings need to be, the broad-based exposure to American innovation.

Cathy Clay:

Well, we couldn’t do it alone, could we? I mean we create the index, but of course, we have to have great companies like the NYSE Group to list these companies and support their evolution and their growth in the capital markets. But, I love the Trump Accounts. I love that you were there for that announcement. I mean there really is this need to broaden the participation for the American households and getting them better access to the capital markets. And, I think this will be a great step in that. How are you viewing that development?

Lynn Martin:

In my mind, it’s also a great unifier for the country and this newest generation. When I think about it, it’s really two factors. Number one, financial literacy. I know that’s an area that you and I both think a lot about. How do we properly educate the investors, not just of today, but the investors of tomorrow. And, I think the advent of the Trump Accounts is a great way to do that. And, number two is, when I bring companies public, when I’m talking to CEOs, one of the reasons they go public is to really unite employees and reward employees for that innovation. They do that with stock very frequently. So, having the newest generation of Americans have effectively stock in America as a result of the contributions to the ETFs that underpin those accounts, to me, that’s such a unifying moment for America. And, we couldn’t do it if we didn’t have the broad market participation. Being in the Oval Office with the president, he was talking to the kids about Boeing, about McDonald’s.

Cathy Clay:

They’re going to know that stock.

Lynn Martin:

Absolutely. He said, go into a McDonald’s and say, I own a piece of you. And, the kids' faces lit up. It is something that truly resonated with the youth of America, and that’s because of the constituents that you put into your index. How do you think about curating that index and ensuring that it has the broadest participation and representation of American innovation?

Cathy Clay:

Well, I think the diversification is really key for how The 500 became America’s benchmark. When you think about this broad diversification, that really is representative of the U.S. economic output. 80% of the market capitalization of U.S.-listed companies are reflected in the S&P 500. And, not only that, the diversity extends to 11 different sectors. So, I think we’re really capturing the enormity of the U.S. capital markets in this one index. And, so I think that is why it has become so preferable for not just ETFs, it was mutual funds before that, it’s all sorts of wrappers now that not just Americans, but global investors really align the S&P 500 with America’s markets.

Lynn Martin:

And, when people think of the S&P 500, a lot of times, they think of ETFs. But, there’s also the active managers who I know are a big constituent base for you to work with on the data side and the benchmarking side of the business.

Cathy Clay:

You’re absolutely right. There is the passive investing side, which is the 700-pound gorilla in the room for the S&P 500, but you’re absolutely right. There’s a lot of active managers who reference the S&P 500 in some of their active strategies. And, one of the big developments recently in the ETF landscape, as you know, are these buffer protect strategies where the ETF issuer is embedding some sort of protections on both the upside and the downside of the S&P 500. So, there is a flavor, I think, for everyone to participate in this amazing ecosystem, which truly is a unique ecosystem.

Lynn Martin:

And, that’s such a great innovation, that product in particular, particularly when you consider where people are in their investing strategy, be it are they at the early part of their wealth accumulation or are they retirees who just want to lock in a return and deliver that return through their golden years.

Cathy Clay:

Yes, it’s flexible. It’s reliable. It’s a trusted benchmark. We’ll turn 70, as I mentioned earlier. So, I think it’s something that people innovate around, but they count on The 500 to be that bedrock, that foundational element within their portfolios.

Lynn Martin:

We’re looking forward to celebrating your 70th anniversary.

Cathy Clay:

We’re going to have to do that right.

Lynn Martin:

We absolutely are. We like the number 70 also since 70% of the constituents in the S&P 500 are proud to call NYSE their listing venue.

Index TV - Jul 14, 2026

Measuring Liquid Commodities through Changing Markets

Length 2:07

Length 2:07

How does a commodity index track liquid futures while seeking to address inflation and volatility in global markets? Look inside the DJCI 3 Month Forward – Quarterly Reweight, a rules-based index that emphasizes diversification and liquidity through a methodology with four distinct elements.

[TRANSCRIPT]

How does a commodity index track liquid futures while seeking to address inflation and volatility in global markets? Meet the Dow Jones Commodity Index 3 Month Forward – Quarterly Reweight. A dynamic index that measures the commodity futures market, consisting of contracts expiring three months from the present date.

The index is derived from the industry-renowned Dow Jones Commodity Index (DJCI)—a broad-based commodity index that measures liquid commodity futures markets. The DJCI 3 Month Forward – Quarterly Reweight emphasizes diversification and liquidity through a straightforward, rules-based approach consisting of four distinct elements.

First, liquidity weighting. Rather than focusing on production, the DJCI framework emphasizes liquidity, reflecting market activity concentration across commodity futures and responding quickly to shifts in supply and demand.

Second, diversified sector constituents. The index is equally weighted between three traditional commodity sectors:

Agriculture & livestock
Industrial & precious metals
Energy

This approach aims to avoid unintended overweighting towards individual commodity sectors and reduces the potential impact of volatility from highly correlated commodity markets.

Third, quarterly reweighting, which is also unique compared to many other commodity indices that may only rebalance once a year, with no reweight throughout the year. In addition to rebalancing in January, the DJCI 3 Month Forward – Quarterly Reweight—as the name implies—reweights quarterly in April, July and October. This quarterly approach seeks to avoid overconcentration in a single commodity as prices fluctuate and accounts for the seasonal volatility and mean reversion typical in the asset class, historically.

Fourth, the use of 3-month futures contracts. Instead of including the nearest expiring futures contracts that are most exposed to spot price volatility, the DJCI 3 Month Forward – Quarterly Reweight measures futures contracts expiring three months from the present date.

Back-tested data demonstrated this methodology has helped the index:

Reduce volatility
Optimize roll yield
Maintain liquidity

Together, these features create a unique and useful way for market participants to track broad-based commodity futures by taking into consideration the asset class’s unique dynamics.

To learn more about the Dow Jones Commodity Index 3 Month Forward – Quarterly Reweight and to get the latest data, visit spglobal.com/spdji.

Index TV - Jul 10, 2026

Tracking High Forecast Dividend Yield in Australia: S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index

Length 6:25

Length 6:25

How are innovative dividend indices helping market participants make more informed decisions? Look under the hood of the S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index, including how it screens to avoid potential yield traps, with S&P DJI's Jason Ye and ausbiz's Andrew Geoghegan.

[TRANSCRIPT]

Andrew Geoghegan:

In a market where income remains a key priority for many investors, dividend strategies continue to play a central role. One index that's designed to tap into this demand is the S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index.

Hello, I'm Andrew Geoghegan of ausbiz, and today, we're exploring how this index works and why dividends matter in the Australian market. Joining me is Jason Ye, Senior Director of Factors and Dividends Indices at S&P Dow Jones Indices. Welcome, Jason. Great to have you with us. Why do dividends matter to the Australian market?

Jason Ye:

The Australian equity market is very well known for its high dividend yields and well-cultivated dividend culture here. We see that dividends have become one of the fastest-growing factor strategies in Australia, and there are several reasons why dividends have been traditionally so widely used in the Australian market.

The first reason why dividend is important is that it's an important component of the total returns in the equity space. If we break down the total return of the S&P/ASX 200 historically, the index data shows a large portion of that total return has come from dividend and dividend reinvestment.

The second reason why dividend is important is that it's an alternative source of income from the equity market. Historically, this has been very important in the periods when the fixed income market experienced a low yield regime, but investors have continued to seek income elsewhere. The dividend-imputation system, in addition, also provides some extra income, especially when they're focusing on the high dividend yield companies.

And, the last reason is the historical performance. In the paper we published, we conducted an empirical study, and we found that, if we assign companies in the S&P/ASX 300 into six groups, one for the non-dividend payers and then five quintiles on the low dividend yield to the high dividend yield, the group of stocks with high dividend yield historically outperformed the S&P/ASX 300.

Andrew Geoghegan:

And, Jason, can you walk us through how the S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index is constructed and how it aims to avoid common yield traps?

Jason Ye:

The S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index was launched in October 2024, and it seeks to measure the performance of 50 stocks with high dividend yield from the S&P/ASX 200. It also incorporates several screens to avoid yield traps. Here is how the index is constructed.

Starting with the S&P/ASX 200 universe, excluding all the REITs, we first include stocks with a positive but maximum of 12% estimated dividend yield. Second, we calculate the momentum value of the stocks, and we exclude the companies ranked in the bottom 10% of the momentum value. Third, we select the 75 stocks with the highest 12-month estimated dividend yield, while we're capping the number of stocks from any GICS sector at 15. And, fourth, among the 75 high dividend yield stocks, we exclude the 25 stocks with the highest volatility-adjusted dividend yield. And, lastly, we weight the stocks by the production of the dividend yield and the float market cap, and we apply stocks and sector capping to avoid concentration risk. And, this index is rebalanced semi-annually in January and July.

Andrew Geoghegan:

And, Jason, walk us through the thinking behind the index design.

Jason Ye:

The main consideration around some of this screening is to address the potential yield traps. A yield trap means that a high dividend yield may come from decreasing stock prices or unsustainable dividend payment. The momentum screen could potentially exclude stocks whose high dividend yield is a result of dropping stock prices. And, then, the 12% yield cap basically excludes companies with unreasonably high dividend yield.

And, the risk-adjusted dividend yield is also an innovative design of the index. It will penalize the companies with high dividend yield but, then, with high volatility. So, think of two stocks that have similar levels of dividend yields. The index would be more likely to select the stock with lower return volatility.

And, finally, using the forward-looking estimated dividend matrix, it may help to reflect the latest market expectations on the company's future dividend payment.

Andrew Geoghegan:

What are the key characteristics of the S&P/ASX 200 High Dividend Index?

Jason Ye:

Based on the back-tested data, the S&P/ASX 200 High Dividend Index demonstrated outperformance, higher dividend yield and lower valuation against the broad market benchmark historically. The historical data, in terms of performance, also shows there's some resilience in terms of the characteristics on the performance during the down market, which means that, on average, the S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index tended to perform better than the underlying benchmark when the market was down.

On the sector allocation, the index is more likely to overweight toward sectors with high dividend yield such as Financials, Energy and Materials. And, overall, the S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index is an innovative tool that can help inform market participants seeking income and who are mindful of potential yield traps.

Andrew Geoghegan:

Jason, thanks again for your insights today. To learn more about the S&P/ASX 200 High Yield Select Index and S&P Dow Jones Indices' latest data and research tracking markets across Australia, please visit the link below.

spglobal.com/spdji/australia

Index TV - Jul 07, 2026

SPIVA By the Numbers: A Global Perspective

Length 08:37

Length 08:37

How difficult is it to beat the benchmark in markets around the world? S&P DJI’s Tim Edwards takes viewers inside the latest SPIVA results and explores the challenges of active management over the long term.

[TRANSCRIPT]

Tim Edwards:

It's an age-old question in investing, what's been doing better, actively managed funds and stock pickers, or the benchmarks that they try and beat? Hello, I'm Tim Edwards, and this is your SPIVA wrap.

One number we'll revisit again later, and a simple perspective is 97% of actively managed funds have been underperforming. But which funds, in which regions, and in which categories versus what benchmark? Let's dig in.

First off, how do we calculate a number like that? What we do is we use mutual fund data providers to get a collection of all the funds that were available a certain time period ago. So it might be all the active funds that were available for sale a year ago, three years ago, five years ago. Once we've created that sample, we'll then track the performance of those funds over the months and years up to a certain endpoint, for example, the end of 2025.

Some of those funds will do well, some of them will do badly, and some of them might actually fail to survive the whole period, as they're merged or liquidated. Once you've got to the end of the period and you've got some that have survived, some that haven't, then, importantly, we assign a benchmark for each fund category. That might be a broad emerging market index or, in the case of large-cap U.S. equities, a very familiar index like the S&P 500. We'll see how the benchmark did and then do something very simple. We'll count how many funds available at the start of the period survived and beat the benchmark. Everything else is counted as an underperformer.

Now, our reports cover fund industries around the world, but the largest and most significant is the U.S. market. And here are some summary statistics from the latest SPIVA U.S. Scorecard, which ran to the end of 2025. There are more categories in the full report, but here are some of the largest ones split across domestic equity, international equity, and fixed income. These figures here show you the one-year underperformance rate. So for example, all domestic U.S equity funds out of all of them that are actively managed, 80% underperformed our broad U.S. benchmark, S&P Composite 1500. The coloring is, the darker the orange, the higher the underperformance rate.

But we don't just look at one year, we do also look at three-year performance horizons, five-year performance horizons, 10-year performance horizons and, actually 20 years as well. And what you can see just visually from this graphic is that in most categories over most time horizons, a majority of actively managed funds underperformed across domestic equity, international equity and fixed income.

Now, there are some exceptions of course, and one of the rich values in this scorecard is showing you where actively managed funds are doing well, and where it's more difficult to beat the benchmark. I'll just highlight here for you the largest U.S. category, U.S. large caps versus the S&P 500, and these three numbers, one-year and three-year and five-year underperformance rates, 79%, 67% and 89%, respectively. That's the record of domestic stock pickers versus their domestic benchmarks.

Here's those same figures as reproduced on a global map, one-, three- and five-year underperformance. And across our 11 global SPIVA Scorecards for different fund regions, there's actually 17 different domestic markets where we can compare fund managers in their category to their local benchmark as reported at the end of 2025. And I'll highlight a couple of things that immediately jump out to me.

The first is that overall the same thing holds. In most markets over most time horizons, a majority of active funds underperformed to the end of 2025. However, you do see significant variation ranging from 43% underperformance in China up to 94% over one year in South Africa. The other thing that jumps out is most of the numbers are actually above 50%. So most regions, most time horizons, actively managed funds were underperforming, or at least a majority were. And the other thing that you might notice is that as the time horizon extends, as you go from left to right on the figures, the numbers tend to go up. That's the equity story.

We have a similar picture on fixed income. Not quite as many markets, but there are a good selection around the world of different markets where we can look at sovereign, investment grade, or high yield bond managers and how are they doing versus benchmarks. You see a similar thing, high degree of variation in the short term ranging from Australia, 27% underperforming, all the way up to the U.S. where 94% of actively managed general government funds underperformed their assigned benchmark.

Now, that's the latest report, but we've actually been producing the SPIVA Scorecards for over 20 years. And that allows us to make not just comparisons between different markets, but also comparisons over time. This is the historical record of the largest U.S. category, actively managed U.S. large cap funds compared to the S&P 500. Here's the 2025 number, 79% underperformance, which was actually high, for a various number of reasons that are actually detailed in the full report.

But it was also the fourth worst out of 25 years, so an unusually difficult year for U.S. equity active funds and not just in that category either. The largest category globally in terms of the number of funds is broad global developed equities. And what we did is, looking across all the SPIVA Scorecards around the world, we took an average across active funds domiciled in Australia, Japan, Canada, the U.S. and Europe to give an aggregate statistic, the percentage of funds underperforming the S&P World Index over one, three, five and ten years. And that's that 97% of actively managed funds underperform, which was the statistic I introduced at the beginning. A rough 10 years globally for fund managers trying to beat broad developed equity benchmarks.

That's equities, and of course, there's been a lot of discussion around fixed income funds. And one of the things that you might have heard a lot is, sure, it's difficult to beat benchmarks in equities, but the bond markets are a different matter. And in fixed income and in high yield bonds in particular, active management does a lot better. Well, what do our SPIVA Scorecards say? If you collect together our Europe and U.S. data, you've got a decent sample set, especially for the high yield fixed income universes in euro and US dollars. Taking an average across those categories, here are the underperformance rates over one, three, five and 10 years.

And two things appear to be true. The first is that, generally speaking, and particularly over long term, the underperformance rate in high yield is lower than it has been for global developed equities. However, better does not mean great, and we're still seeing a significant majority of actively managed funds underperforming benchmarks over various time horizons. Those are just some of the highlights from the range of global SPIVA Scorecards that we produce every six months.

And it's not just actively managed funds versus benchmarks. We also look at different metrics with reports on how persistent the outperformance is of those funds who did outperform, looking at tax-adjusted returns, looking at portfolios of active funds, and much, much more. All of these reports and more can be viewed at our website if you visit www.spglobal.com/spiva.

As 2025 fades into history, market participants in 2026 have faced an extraordinary new set of challenges and opportunities. How have actively managed funds performed? Well, we'll find out on our next edition of SPIVA Scorecards, but for now, thank you for watching.

Index TV - Jul 06, 2026

The Rebalance | The Future of Indexing On-Chain with Kaiko

Length 6:40

Length 6:40

The Rebalance is a video podcast series hosted by S&P DJI CEO Cathy Clay, exploring the trends, ideas and innovations shaping the future of capital markets. In this installment, Cathy sits down with Kaiko CEO Ambre Soubiran to discuss S&P DJI’s collaboration with Kaiko to tokenize the iBoxx USD Treasuries Index and bring a major financial benchmark on-chain as a native digital asset. Learn how trusted benchmarks, digital asset infrastructure and institutional standards are coming together to support the next generation of capital markets.

[TRANSCRIPT]

Cathy Clay:

Hi everyone, and welcome back to The Rebalance. I’m so excited to continue exploring the trends reshaping indexing and capital markets and how they’re driving our work at S&P DJI. Now, today we’re diving into something that’s becoming impossible to ignore. How on-chain markets are changing the game for index providers.

And today I’m joined by Ambre Souriban, CEO and Chairman of Kaiko, who we collaborated with to bring the first major financial benchmark on-chain as a native digital asset. We recently tokenized the iBoxx USD Treasuries Index together. And I want to explore what that means not just as a milestone, but as a signal of where indexing is headed. Ambre, thanks for joining me today. So nice to have you. And before we dig in, though, maybe you could tell the audience a little bit about Kaiko.

Ambre Souriban:

Of course. Thank you for having me. Kaiko is a data analytics index and data infrastructure company.

Cathy Clay:

That’s a lot.

Ambre Souriban:

Yeah. Specialize in the world of digital assets. So native assets on the blockchain, initially mostly crypto and now increasingly non-crypto and all sorts of tokenized assets.

Cathy Clay:

So I mentioned the iBoxx USD Treasuries Index that we tokenized together. Thank you so much for your partnership on that. But maybe talk a little bit about truly what that means to have a tokenized index natively on the blockchain. What does that unlock?

Ambre Souriban:

Yes. So the idea with our data infrastructure product is really to offer a distribution play for data owners and IP owners into the blockchain world. So what that means is that your clients that are index-linked product issuers can consume that token natively on the blockchain and wrap it into a financial asset that they’re going to issue on the blockchain.

Cathy Clay:

That’s really incredible because when I think about what that gives us as the index provider, it gives us complete traceability and auditability of all of the terms economics that you talked about, embedded in that tokenized index, that’s pretty powerful.

Ambre Souriban:

Yeah, absolutely. And that is why there’s a key difference between providing and publishing the price of the index on-chain, which is very valuable in some use cases, and creating an actual transferable token that is then portable from a wallet to another, meaning that you can transfer that IP to a client and track where your IP goes into the value chain of building a investable financial product.

Cathy Clay:

Now, you obviously talked to a lot of participants in this on-chain ecosystem. If I asked you where do you think indexing is heading, what would you say?

Ambre Souriban:

I think it’s really interesting in the area where you will have financial transaction referencing those indices in products that can be invested directly on-chain. We are working right now with an OTC swaps platform that will offer banks the ability to natively on-chain trade those indices. So, this is typically something whereby the index is created, tokenized, transferred and then embedded into a financial product natively on-chain. And this is really the whole kind of value proposition of blockchain is to disintermediate the value chain of creating, investing and trading a financial asset.

Cathy Clay:

Is this a fad, a phase, or is this something that is inevitably happening?

Ambre Souriban:

I think there is no putting the genie back in the bottle. Honestly, I think we’re now in a world where assets are natively tokenized on-chain and we are going to get to the second phase. Tokenization is there now. It’s done at scale. We’re seeing U.S. Treasuries natively issued on-chain. We’re seeing money market funds and kind of collateral being tokenized. The question now is how do we embed it into financial products?

And that cannot be done unless you can pair the tokenized asset with its market price. You can enable 24/7 finance, continuous finance, if you can provide 24/7 marks and prices for collateral. And this is really where I believe there’s a fascinating play for data owners such as S&P Dow Jones Indices, both on the data side and on the index side in participating in this on-chain finance.

Seeing an increasing number of purely traditional financial applications that are now being brought onto crypto native rails and what we’re seeing essentially is a real merge of traditional assets and blockchain infrastructure. How do you see that evolving from your perspective?

Cathy Clay:

Well, it’s super exciting because I think you’re absolutely right. We’re seeing really this confluence of TradFi moving towards DeFi. We’re seeing DeFi moving towards TradFi. So really the only question in my head is what does that end convergence look like? But there’s no doubt there is going to be convergence. And the way I think about the opportunity for S&P DJI is what has made traditional finance so strong, so trusted is having our indices and benchmarks available for the investing public to reference, to look at relative performance, to assess risk, to understand portfolios.

What really excites me is the ability to bring these indices into this new world of on-chain finance and establish the same trusted benchmarks, the North Star for investors, for traders, for asset managers to really lean into. And it should build trust in this new space. So again, the convergence, we still need to get the trust of benchmarks over. And with your help, getting the tokenized iBoxx, that’s the first step and really what we need to do on a grand scale. Ambre, it was so amazing having you here today. I always learn so much in our conversations together. So thank you for coming.

Our collaboration with Kaiko isn’t just about one tokenized benchmark, it’s about proving that institutional trust and digital innovation can advance together. Setting the foundation for how benchmarks will work in tomorrow’s markets. What excites me most is that we’re not waiting for on-chain finance to fully mature before engaging or helping shape the standards that institutional capital will rely on as these markets evolve. I hope this conversation gave you a sense of how we’re building the future of trusted benchmarks in programmable markets. See you next time.

S&P Global Offerings

Market Intelligence

Ratings

Energy

S&P Dow Jones Indices

Mobility

Featured Topics

Featured Products

S&P Capital IQ Pro

S&P Global Energy Core

S&P Global ESG Scores

AutoCreditInsight

Ratings360

SPICE: The Index Source for ESG Data

Events

Careers

Our Services

Our Services

Data & Index Licensing

Data Delivery Platforms

Private Investment Benchmarks

Investment Themes

U.S. Core

Fixed Income

Factors

Thematics

Professional Resources

Wealth Managers

Insurance

Institutional Investor

Defined Contribution

Equity

Fixed Income

Commodities

Multi-Asset

Private Markets

Sustainability

Dividends & Factors

Digital Assets

Thematics

Indicators

Other Strategies

By Region

Our Exchange Relationships

North America

Latin America

EMEA

Asia Pacific

Research & Insights

Research

Education

Performance Reports

SPIVA

Investment Themes

Blog

Events & Webinars

Index TV

Education

Education

Our Education Partnerships

Index Literacy: An Investor's Guide to Indices

VIX: A Primer on the Volatility Gauge

Performance Reports

View All

Index Dashboards

Quarterly Reports

Global Daily Index Dashboard

SPIVA®

SPIVA Data

About SPIVA

SPIVA Library

Investment Themes

Events & Webinars

In-Person Events

Webinars

Webinars on Demand

Governance

Regulatory Information

Methodologies

Consultations