S&P reports: number of shareholders?
"Yes these are the number of shareholders that are not held in ""street name"" plus the different brokerages that hold the shares in ""street name"".  So the stat is pointless since it really only lists the few people who own the stocks outside of a brokerage account and a bunch of wall street brokers."
You are correct that over a short term there is no guarantee that one index will out perform another index. Every index goes through periods of feat and famine. That uis why the advice is to diversify your investments. Every index does have some small amount of management. For the parent index (the S&P 500 in this case) there is a process to divide all 500 stocks into growth and value, pure growth and pure value. This rebalancing of the 500 stocks occurs once a year. Rebalancing The S&P Style indices are rebalanced once a year in December. The   December rebalancing helps set the broad universe and benchmark for   active managers on an annual cycle consistent with active manager   performance evaluation cycles. The rebalancing date is the third   Friday of December, which coincides with the December quarterly share   changes for the S&P Composite 1500.  Style Scores,   market-capitalization weights, growth and value midpoint averages, and   the Pure Weight Factors (PWFs), where applicable across the various   Style indices, are reset only once a year at the December rebalancing. Other changes to the U.S. Style indices are made on an as-needed   basis, following the guidelines of the parent index. Changes in   response to corporate actions and market developments can be made at   any time. Constituent changes are typically announced for the parent   index two-to-five days before they are scheduled to be implemented. Please refer to the S&P U.S. Indices Methodology document for   information on standard index maintenance for the S&P 500, the S&P   MidCap 400,the S&P SmallCap 600 and all related indices. As to which is better: 500, growth,value or growth and value? That depends on what you the investor is trying to do. 449 of the 500 companies in the S&amp;P 500 used 54% of their earnings to buy back shares for over $2 trillion.   Rather than invest in development, capital, human capital, bigger dividends, they're repurchasing shares to boost their EPS and increase share value in the short term. Why is this an issue? Because it shows that these companies are uneasy about the long term. It stunts growth. Doesn't have to be research, simply expansion or rewarding employees/shareholders. Employees of the company receive no benefits and bagholders may make a quick buck short term, but suffer long. Execs of the company however get fat AF checks for hitting target ratios and price. Stock buybacks enable this. During the course of the year, the S&P individual stocks will have some dividends. Not every last stock but a good number of them. Enough that the average dividend for the S&P has been about 2% recently.  So if the S&P index goes up, say 10%, an S&P fund should go up closer to 12%. For a fund holder, you'd normally see a declared dividend and cap gain distribution toward the end of each year. When you hold shares in a 401(k), dividends are reinvested into the fund, usually with no involvement from the members. Here is a quote from the IRS website on this topic: You may be able to deduct premiums paid for medical and dental   insurance and qualified long-term care insurance for yourself, your   spouse, and your dependents. The insurance can also cover your child   who was under age 27 at the end of 2011, even if the child was not   your dependent. A child includes your son, daughter, stepchild,   adopted child, or foster child. A foster child is any child placed   with you by an authorized placement agency or by judgment, decree, or   other order of any court of competent jurisdiction. One of the following statements must be true. You were self-employed and had a net profit for the year reported on   Schedule C (Form 1040), Profit or Loss From Business; Schedule C-EZ   (Form 1040), Net Profit From Business; or Schedule F (Form 1040),   Profit or Loss From Farming. You were a partner with net earnings from self-employment for the year   reported on Schedule K-1 (Form 1065), Partner's Share of Income,   Deductions, Credits, etc., box 14, code A. You used one of the optional methods to figure your net earnings from   self-employment on Schedule SE. You received wages in 2011 from an S corporation in which you were a   more-than-2% shareholder. Health insurance premiums paid or reimbursed   by the S corporation are shown as wages on Form W-2, Wage and Tax   Statement. The insurance plan must be established, or considered to be   established as discussed in the following bullets, under your   business. For self-employed individuals filing a Schedule C, C-EZ, or F, a   policy can be either in the name of the business or in the name of the   individual. For partners, a policy can be either in the name of the partnership or   in the name of the partner. You can either pay the premiums yourself   or your partnership can pay them and report the premium amounts on   Schedule K-1 (Form 1065) as guaranteed payments to be included in your   gross income. However, if the policy is in your name and you pay the   premiums yourself, the partnership must reimburse you and report the   premium amounts on Schedule K-1 (Form 1065) as guaranteed payments to   be included in your gross income. Otherwise, the insurance plan will   not be considered to be established under your business. For more-than-2% shareholders, a policy can be either in the name of   the S corporation or in the name of the shareholder. You can either   pay the premiums yourself or your S corporation can pay them and   report the premium amounts on Form W-2 as wages to be included in your   gross income. However, if the policy is in your name and you pay the   premiums yourself, the S corporation must reimburse you and report the   premium amounts on Form W-2 as wages to be included in your gross   income. Otherwise, the insurance plan will not be considered to be   established under your business. Medicare premiums you voluntarily pay to obtain insurance in your name   that is similar to qualifying private health insurance can be used to   figure the deduction. If you previously filed returns without using   Medicare premiums to figure the deduction, you can file timely amended   returns to refigure the deduction. For more information, see Form   1040X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return. Amounts paid for health insurance coverage from retirement plan   distributions that were nontaxable because you are a retired public   safety officer cannot be used to figure the deduction. Take the deduction on Form 1040, line 29. authorized 100,000,000 shares They cannot issue shares more than that so 102M isn't possible. Common stock - $.01 par value, authorized 100,000,000 shares, issued 51,970,721 and 51,575,743 shares     If you look at the right 2 columns it become clear what it means. You missed the $ symbol and on the top (In thousands, except share amounts) ouststanding share 51,970,721 -> 520 On Sept 30, 2014 outstanding shares * 0.01 and rounded off to arrive at 520. ouststanding share 51,575,743 -> 516 On June 30, 2014 outstanding shares * 0.01 and rounded off to arrive at 516. What a pointless list!  It's ranked by total short interest outstanding.  That's completely meaningless.  For instance, a $1 billion company with $1 billion in shorts (meaning the market thinks it's bankrupt) would be ranked much better than a $100 billion company with $1.1 billion in short interest.  tl;dr:  pure and utter bullshit This is a good reminder for investors to be skeptical of M&amp;A with respect to shareholder value creation.  &gt; S&amp;P Global Market Intelligence Quantamental Research, a research arm of the ratings agency, has updated a study on the impact of deals on the acquiring company’s share price. The study looked at M&amp;A deals done by listed companies in America’s Russell 3000 index between January 2001 and August 2017; deals were only included if they cost more than 5% of the total enterprise value of the acquirer (5% of the equity value, for financial companies). The acquirers’ shares underperformed the market ([see chart](https://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/640-width/images/print-edition/20171007_FNC817_1.png)) and those of rival firms in the same industry. There is a survivorship bias in the mutual fund industry. It's not about individual stocks in which those funds invest. Rather, it's in which funds and fund companies/families are still around. The underperforming funds get closed or merged into other funds. Thus they are no longer reported, since they no longer exist. This makes a single company's mutual funds appear to have a better history, on average, than they actually did. Similarly, fund companies that underperform, will go out of business. This could make the mutual fund industry's overall history appear to be better than it actually was. Most companies don't do this to deliberately game the numbers. It's rational on the part of fund companies to close underperforming funds. When a fund has a below average history, investors will likely not invest in it, and will remove their existing money. The fund will shrink while the overhead remains the same, making the fund unprofitable for the company to run.