At the start of 2025, very few could have predicted the wild ride that awaited equity markets. After a volatile period that culminated on April 8, U.S. equities achieved several new all-time highs, with small-cap equities reaching a first all-time high since November 2021. Absolute returns have been substantial, as the Russell 2000 rose nearly 42% off the market bottom through October 31. Despite renewed volatility in November as expectations for another Federal Reserve rate cut fluctuated, small-cap equities have led large-cap equities since April 8. As is expected in the first six months of a bull market, low quality, including residual volatility, short interest, non-earners, and beta, propelled the small-cap market. Conversely, active managers favor high quality companies, typically characterized by high returns on equity, strong balance sheets, and low leverage. As a result, this factor backdrop is a known headwind for many active managers across the small-cap universe, and this bull market is no different.
Topic Tags: U.S. Equity
No Small Headwind for Small-Cap Managers
Small-cap equities are in a prolonged period of underperformance relative to large-cap stocks, but this trend has shown early signs of reversing in the aftermath of intra-year market lows on April 8, with the Russell 2000 Index up roughly 41% since that time. Interestingly, unprofitable companies within the benchmark have led the way, gaining more than 72% compared to a relatively meager 29% for profitable constituents of the Russell 2000 Index. Although the overall small-cap equity market is currently in line with its average bull market return amid this run, recent performance of unprofitables far exceeds historical norms. This dynamic can be observed in the chart above.
One of the major consequences of this trend is significant underperformance of actively managed small-cap strategies, which typically eschew companies with poor fundamentals. Specifically, the average active small-cap blend manager (as represented by the Morningstar category average) has underperformed the Russell 2000 Index by more than 10 percentage points since April 8, an extreme not seen in roughly 25 years. On the positive side, active small-cap strategies have slightly outperformed profitable small-cap companies, which are more likely to be included in these types of funds. Should this persist, it may be a tailwind for active managers, as profitable companies may have additional upside from here based on trends observed in prior bull markets. That said, more accommodative monetary policy and fiscal support may lead to additional strength from unprofitables and, as a result, further underperformance of active managers.
3Q 2025 Market Insights
This video is a recording of a live webinar held October 22 by Marquette’s research team analyzing the third quarter across the economy and various asset classes as well as themes we’ll be monitoring through the rest of 2025.
Our quarterly Market Insights series examines the primary asset classes we cover for clients including the U.S. economy, fixed income, U.S. and non-U.S. equities, hedge funds, real assets, and private markets, with commentary by our research analysts and directors.
Featuring:
Greg Leonberger, FSA, EA, MAAA, FCA, Partner, Director of Research
Frank Valle, CFA, CAIA, Associate Director of Fixed Income
James Torgerson, Senior Research Analyst
Catherine Hillier, Senior Research Analyst
David Hernandez, CFA, Director of Traditional Manager Search
Evan Frazier, CFA, CAIA, Senior Research Analyst
Dennis Yu, Research Analyst
Amy Miller, Associate Director of Private Equity
Sign up for research alerts to be invited to future webinars and notified when we publish new videos.
If you have any questions, please send our team an email.
The Calm Before the Storm?
I spent the past weekend at my alma mater to watch them play their biggest rival. Football weekends there are filled with celebrations, traditions, and of course, tailgating. Saturday was a quintessential Midwestern day to be outside: sunny, low 70s, light breeze — no better conditions for food and drinks in the parking lot. About three hours before kickoff, however, massive thunderstorms rolled in which sent fans scurrying for cover and threatened to delay the game. For fans who hadn’t checked the forecast, they were ill-prepared to stay dry and enjoy the game as it rained for the duration of the match. Nonetheless, the stadium stayed full for the entire game, a testament to the home team’s performance as well as fan loyalty. That said, I saw plenty of cold and wet attendees in the concourse after the game — those who weren’t equipped for the conditions undoubtedly wished they had been better prepared for what the environment brought Saturday.
On my drive home Sunday, I couldn’t help but worry if as investors we find ourselves right where I was Saturday afternoon, wondering if the conditions were too good to be true for a mid-October day in the Midwest.
Two Sentiments Diverged
This week’s chart compares institutional and retail investor sentiment using two established indicators. Institutional sentiment is represented by the National Association of Active Investment Managers (NAAIM) Exposure Index, which measures the average U.S. equity market exposure reported by NAAIM member firms (i.e., organizations that actively manage client portfolios). Reported exposures for this index include -200% (leveraged short) to -100% (fully short), 0% (market neutral), +100% (fully invested), and +200% (leveraged long), capturing the breadth of positioning from extremely bearish to highly bullish. Retail sentiment is represented by the American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) Sentiment Survey, which reflects the bullish-minus-bearish spread regarding the six-month outlook for stocks across individual AAII members (i.e., retail investors). When analyzed together, these indicators offer perspective on how both institutional and individual investors view the near-term prospects of equity markets.
Readers will note that these two indices have moved in tandem throughout most of the last several years but have diverged significantly in recent weeks as retail investor sentiment has plunged. It is not entirely clear what’s driving this latest divergence, but several factors likely play a role. Specifically, renewed U.S.–China trade tensions, the ongoing federal government shutdown, and interest rate uncertainty have likely weighed more heavily on retail investors, who tend to be more influenced by headline noise. Institutional money managers, on the other hand, appear to be maintaining confidence in healthy corporate fundamentals and the broader economic backdrop. Regardless of its exact cause, this divergence underscores the notion that sentiment data should be viewed as context-dependent rather than as a market timing signal.
The Paths to Liquidity
After a three-year drought, the IPO market is stirring again… but only for a select few. Just 18 companies have gone public in the U.S. through the end of June, which puts 2025 on pace to be the slowest year for IPOs in a decade (though total exit value this year has already surpassed 2024 levels). The companies that have listed thus far in 2025 have looked markedly stronger from a fundamental standpoint than those in the 2021 cohort. Indeed, nearly a quarter are profitable, with average revenues above $800 million and median valuation-to-revenue multiples around 4x (down from roughly 17x a few years earlier). This new IPO class has clustered around themes like artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency, defense, and space, all of which have been buoyed by government policy and widespread investor interest in growth.
This being said, the secondary market has quietly become a powerful alternative source of liquidity that has reshaped the venture capital ecosystem. According to PitchBook, U.S. venture secondary transactions reached $61.1 billion over the past year, slightly exceeding VC-backed IPO exit value and accounting for nearly one-third of all venture exits. “Mega-unicorns” such as SpaceX, Stripe, Databricks, and OpenAI have actively launched tender offers and secondary SPVs to provide liquidity for employees and investors while remaining private enterprises. The secondary market has expanded rapidly in recent years, with dedicated dry powder reaching $8.2 billion in 2024 (up from roughly $4 billion in 2022) and SPV capital raising surging more than tenfold. Still, despite this remarkable growth, secondary exit value remains a small slice of the venture ecosystem at just 1.9% of total unicorn market value.
The result of these dynamics is a tale of two markets: One public and highly selective, the other private, flexible, and increasingly institutionalized. While acquisitions continue to account for most venture exits by volume, the evolving dynamic between IPOs and secondaries is redefining how liquidity is delivered to investors… and redefining what “going public” really means in today’s venture landscape.
2025 Investment Symposium
Watch the flash talks from Marquette’s 2025 Investment Symposium livestream on September 26 in the player below — use the upper-right list icon to access a specific presentation.
- Public vs. Private: A Fixed Income Collision
Frank Valle, CFA, CAIA, Chad Sheaffer, CFA, CAIA, and James Torgerson - What Makes a Good Fiduciary?
Linsey Schoemehl Payne and Stephanie Osten - The Changing Face of Real Estate
Greg Leonberger, FSA, EA, MAAA, FCA - U.S. Equity Markets: Trend or New Normal?
Catherine Hillier - Private Equity in 2026 and Beyond: Allocations, Expectations, and the New Reality
Amy Miller and Chris Caparelli, CFA - Will U.S. Exceptionalism Continue for Global Equities?
David Hernandez, CFA
Please feel free to reach out to any of the presenters should you have any questions.
The Running of the Bulls
Barring a significant equity market drawdown in the coming weeks, the current bull market will turn three years old in October. The gains posted by the S&P 500 Index during this time have certainly been robust, with the benchmark delivering 24% and 36% returns in the first and second 12-month periods of the current bull market, respectively. This strong performance has led many investors to question if stocks will continue to deliver in the near future. Interestingly, bull markets in decades past have seen positive stock returns well into the third, fourth, and fifth years; however, these gains tend to be more muted than those notched in the first two years. Over the last 50 years, the pattern has often been the following:
- Year one: Explosive gains are recorded as markets rebound from oversold conditions. The average return of the S&P 500 Index in the year after a bear market trough is roughly 37%.
- Year two: Equity returns are still strong but less extreme, with the S&P 500 Index averaging a return of 17%. Earnings growth and investor confidence begin to stabilize.
- Years three–five: Equity momentum slows. Average returns compress to 8%–13% and markets become more vulnerable to corrections.
To expand on the final bullet point, the third, fourth, and fifth years of a bull market often prove shakier given the convergence of several structural factors. For instance, early in the cycle, central banks and governments typically provide aggressive stimulus to allow markets to recover from troughs; however, inflation and financial stability risks typically arise within a few years. These factors usually prompt tightening from policymakers, which can constrain equity performance. At the same time, the sharp rebound in corporate profits that characterizes the first two years begins to normalize, making year-over-year comparisons less favorable. Valuations, which tend to increase in the early innings of a bull market as confidence returns, also usually peak around year three. This causes any future stock gains to be more dependent on genuine fundamental improvements (i.e., earnings growth) rather than continued multiple expansion. Finally, after two years of strong performance, investor sentiment often shifts from optimism to caution, with growing fears that current conditions may not persist. While it is impossible to predict the trajectory of equity markets from here, it may be prudent for investors to expect more muted gains from stocks in the years ahead simply based on historical patterns.
The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Markets
Over the last several decades, artificial intelligence (“AI”) has evolved from a theoretical concept into a transformative force across a variety of industries. The 1940s saw the advent of the digital computer, which was followed years later by the first artificial neural network, a computational model inspired by the structure of the human brain that consists of algorithms that attempt to recognize relationships in data. In more recent years, researchers have developed “deep learning” systems (i.e., neural networks with many layers) capable of increasingly complex tasks including image recognition, reading comprehension, and predictive reasoning. Given the advances in the space, it should not come as a surprise that the use cases of artificial intelligence are now vast, with AI tools now implemented across fields including health care, retail, finance, and entertainment. Researchers and corporate executives are not the only ones to have noticed the remarkable potential of AI, however, as investors have flocked to the space in droves over the last several years.
This newsletter outlines the growth of AI as an investment theme, including performance, valuations, and earnings growth of AI-related companies and equities, other segments of the market that may stand to benefit from advances in AI, and potential risks for investors.
3 vs. 2000
In last year’s “2 vs. 2000” Chart of the Week publication, we explored the emergence of trillion-dollar companies, noting that Microsoft and Apple had each exceeded the combined market capitalization of Russell 2000 Index constituents. Since then, another technology giant has crossed that threshold, with NVIDIA recently becoming the first company to reach a market capitalization of $4 trillion. While Microsoft currently hovers around this level thanks to robust earnings and demand for its cloud and enterprise solutions, Apple has experienced more turmoil in recent time. In the first three months of this year, Apple shed nearly $1.5 trillion from its market capitalization amid trade tensions and concerns about slowing growth. During this bout of volatility, the company briefly became smaller than the U.S. small-cap equity universe, but a rally sparked by its announcement to bring manufacturing back to the U.S. helped Apple regain its footing and once again surpass the Russell 2000 Index in terms of market capitalization.
The meteoric rise of Apple, Microsoft, and NVIDIA underscores ongoing investor preferences for large-cap, technology-focused companies. In contrast, the U.S. small-cap space, which is more tilted toward businesses in sectors like Financials and Industrials, has struggled in recent years for this same reason. The Russell 2000 Index has also been negatively impacted by the realization of smaller company growth within private markets, as outlined in a recent newsletter. Going forward, investors should be cognizant of the risks posed by both large and small companies and remain adequately diversified across the market capitalization spectrum.