Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 545

Challenges for the Magnificent Seven stocks

Envy of the other 493 stocks in the S&P 500, the so-called Magnificent Seven—including Apple, Alphabet, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla—wears extraordinary stripes. In the seven years prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, their collective top line grew at 15% compounded annually, versus just 2% for the rest of the index. Since 2020, the Mag 7 have increased sales by 16% a year.1

Even in a challenging growth environment, these heavyweights delivered impressively in 2023: The Mag 7’s net income grew 34% versus 1% for the other 493 stocks in the index (see the left side of figure 1), and in a show of investor confidence, their collective P/E multiple expanded 30% compared to 9% for all the rest. As a group, the Mag 7 generated a 75% return for the year versus 25% for the S&P 500; without them, the broader index would have risen just 12% (as shown on the right).

Figure 1: The Magnificent Seven have dominated the other 493 names in the S&P 500 index

Big tech’s influence on sector performance was palpable, too. Without these seven names, the Tech sector would have returned just 15% rather than 50%; the Communication Services sector, 7% versus 50%; and the Consumer Discretionary sector, 6% versus 33%.2

It has wider implications

We believe the collective heft of the Mag 7 has even broader implications for investors. The influence of this group—which now comprises nearly half the market-cap weight of the Russell 1000 Growth index and 28% of the S&P 500—has been boldly on display. In 2023, just one-third of U.S. core- and growth-oriented funds outperformed their Mag 7-heavy benchmarks, whereas nearly twice as many value funds outpaced their benchmarks, which don’t include the Mag 7 (see the left chart in figure 2).

The Mag 7’s influence spans geographical borders as well. The weight of U.S. equities in the MSCI ACWI index has risen to an all-time high of 63% from just 46% in 2013. Less appreciated, perhaps, is that fully a third of this increase is due to the rise of the Mag 7! As a result, the U.S. now accounts for 1.7 times the weight of the rest of the world combined; without the Mag 7, the figure is a more modest 1.2 (as shown on the right). Such a reduction in geographical diversification within the index, we believe, could have longer-term implications for asset allocation and risk management.

Figure 2: The collective heft of the Mag 7 has broad risk-management implications

In light of their sheer size and influence, we expect the Mag 7 will continue to shake up active managers’ scorecards relative to their benchmarks in 2024, and beyond.

All the glitters may not keep turning to gold

The Mag 7’s achievements in 2023 notwithstanding, we fear these marquee stocks could face headwinds in the coming year.

First, valuations appear precarious, in our view. Wall Street expects the Mag 7’s earnings and revenues to grow 33% and 17% per year, respectively, through 2025 (see the left chart in figure 3). Yet even considering the group’s relatively high returns on equity (shown on the right), the Mag 7 has the unnerving distinction of being the largest and most expensive grouping within the S&P 500. At current valuations, we believe this group—which now represents more than a quarter of the S&P 500—is roughly 60% more expensive on a P/E basis than the rest of the index, making them potentially vulnerable to even minor hiccups in the coming year.

Figure 3: The mag 7’s strong earnings expectations are commanding relatively rich valuations

Second, the Mag 7 may prove more cyclical than investors seem to expect. These giants are often considered defensive businesses given that their products drive the relentless modernization of society, and that they also boast strong balance sheets and relatively high, stable profit margins. Indeed, over the last three years, the Mag 7’s earnings beta to nominal GDP has been 30% lower than the rest of the S&P 500 (see the left side of figure 4); however, the price beta of these stocks—at 1.4—was 50% higher than the rest of the S&P 500 (as shown the on right).

Figure 4: The Mag 7 may be less defensive than investors anticipate

Third, we believe the price returns of these seven stocks are highly correlated to each other—meaning that, from a portfolio perspective, owning them as a group is akin to inviting additional risk rather than diversifying away from it. Since 2017, the average pairwise correlation of the Mag 7 has been 55%—that’s 70% higher than for the rest of the 493 stocks.3 Furthermore, we find that correlation tends to rise during selloffs, which could make holding these stocks even riskier in a downturn.

Therefore—and despite some of their defensive characteristics—we fear that investors may have overlooked the inherent cyclicality and correlation of the mega-caps, potentially magnifying the investment risk should the Mag 7 begin to lose favour.

Other things to influence Mag 7's prospects

Looking at these stocks another way—through a factor lens—makes us conclude that overweighting these stocks is essentially a wager on specific factors that have contributed to their outperformance.

One of those factors is international exposure. As shown on the left side of figure 5, the Mag 7 derives roughly half of its revenues from outside the U.S., about twice the percentage for the average U.S. publicly traded company. Adding the Mag 7 to an equity portfolio could increase its sensitivity to international growth—a potential benefit when the global economy is humming, but a potential drag in a broader slowdown.

Figure 5: Specific factor exposures may determine the Mag 7’s outperformance

Additional factors may determine the Mag 7’s performance in 2024. Specifically, and relative to the index, the Mag 7 are rich in size, quality, momentum and growth factors, and outperform when these factors are in vogue. As noted in our previous 4Q 2023 Equity Outlook, these factors tend to be rewarded when economic growth slows—as it did in 2023—while being relatively shunned in favour of small size, lower earnings quality and high value when growth eventually rebounds.

 

1  Source: FactSet. Data as of December 15, 2023
2  Source: Strategus. Data as of December 5, 2023
3  Source: Neuberger Berman Research and FactSet. Data as of December 15, 2023.

 

Raheel Siddiqui is a Senior Research Analyst, Global Equity Research at Neuberger Berman, a sponsor of Firstlinks. This information discusses general market activity, industry, or sector trends, or other broad-based economic, market or political conditions and should not be construed as research or investment advice. It is not intended to be an offer or the solicitation of an offer.

For more articles and papers from Neuberger Berman, click here.

 

  •   31 January 2024
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Why it's better to be too early than too late

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Why spending more in early retirement can improve lifetime income

Conventional wisdom encourages retirees to preserve superannuation. But if those likely to qualify for the Age Pension later in life spend a little more today, it may deliver higher lifetime income and a more stable retirement.

Is it time to bail on Australian stocks?

For generations, Australian investors have backed banks, miners and dividends. But has that loyalty come at a cost? A look at the numbers raises an uncomfortable question about where future returns will come from.

Meg on SMSFs: What do we think about reversionary pensions these days?

Reversionary pensions have long been a staple of SMSF estate planning, but are they still the best option? Meg Heffron revisits a once-clear favourite and asks whether changing super rules have shifted the balance.

Testamentary trusts survived the trust tax. The drafting battle has just begun.

The fight over testamentary trusts looked settled. Then the draft legislation arrived. Hidden in a technical detail is a question that could force many families to rethink wills they thought were already future-proof.

How does the 4% rule stack up?

The 4% rule has long been retirement's gold standard. But after a difficult period for investors, fresh analysis suggests a more conservative approach may significantly improve the chances of making savings last.

The new capital gains tax trap for your portfolio

Investors have long accepted one portfolio rule without much question. A major tax shift could change that calculation entirely, forcing difficult trade-offs between risk, discipline and an overlooked cost lurking beneath.

Latest Updates

Exchange traded products

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

Taxation

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Retirement

Three considerations before reshaping your legacy plan

Many retirees hope to leave a legacy. Proposed trust tax reforms could force families to rethink. The question is not how much to leave behind, but whether today's inheritance plans will still make sense as circumstances change.

Investment strategies

Why experienced investors still get markets wrong

Retirement is approaching. Markets are noisy. And every headline seems to demand action. The biggest investment risk isn't fear, greed or market volatility, it often arrives disguised as research and sensible risk management.

Shares

Why pay more for less?

Conditions were stacked in favour of professional investors in 2026. Most still fell short, raising questions about where investors should look for value. Meanwhile, an alternative strategy continued to make its case.

Investment strategies

Bleeding air out of the bubble

Equity valuations have fallen sharply over the past year, yet investors have largely been spared the volatility and losses that typically accompany a de-rating. What explains this unusually orderly reset? Here are five key drivers.

Strategy

Has AI gone rogue?

We worry about AI becoming conscious. But what if consciousness isn't the issue? The more unsettling possibility is a machine capable of pursuing objectives relentlessly, without motives, emotions, or awareness of any kind.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.