But it's a very different Nasdaq than it was 13 years ago, the last time it visited the heady air above 4000, as it did on Monday.
That was the exhilarating era of the dot-com bubble, when analysts Mary Meeker and Henry Blodget commanded rock-star status on Wall Street; CMGI had its name on the New England Patriots' stadium; and networking gear maker JDSU Uniphase's stock jumped above $1,000 a share.
Thirteen years later, Meeker has faded into relative obscurity; Blodget has reinvented himself as an Internet publisher (although he is barred from the securities industry for life and was fined $4 million for misleading investors); Gillette picked up CMGI's naming rights; and many investors have no idea what JDS Uniphase is — and its stock trades at $12.
Nasdaq 4000. Same number. Different world. We've gone through a horrific terrorist attack on 9/11, two wars — one ongoing — two massive bear markets and two recessions.
(While the Nasdaq was able to get as high at 4,007.09 during the day, selling pressure eventually won out and left it up just 2.92 points at 3,994.57, just shy of the big round number.)
Tech investors in 2000 were right about the possibilities of the Internet and mobile computing. But they were dead wrong about which companies would be in the vanguard and how long those advances would take.
And they paid the price.
Returning to 4000 — first crossed in December 1999 and last seen in September 2000 — is a symbolic end to more than a decade of pain. Legions of investors plunged into the tech-stock craze of the late 1990s in search of easy riches and ended up falling victim to the worst crash since the Great Depression.
The Nasdaq fell 78% in 2½ years. Many investors worried it might be a long time before they got their money back. But few could have imagined it would be this long.
"It's taken 13 years to get back," says Jack Ablin of BMO Private Bank. "It just shows the magnitude of that bubb! le we expanded back in 1999 and 2000."
Then, 1000-point barriers fell roughly every two months, as investors piled into money-losing Internet companies. The technology firms that did make money commonly carried triple-digit valuations, meaning investors would pay $100 or more to own a claim to every dollar in profit the companies generated. This time it's been 21 months since the Nasdaq crossed 3000, and many leading tech stocks have P-Es in the teens, meaning now investors are paying a much more reasonable price, roughly $15 to own a claim to every dollar in companies' profits.
Top 10 Stocks To Buy Right Now
But while 4000 is cause for celebration for battle-scarred investors, the watershed doesn't erase the torment. While the broader indexes — the Dow Jones industrial average and Standard & Poor's 500 — have set all-time highs all year, the Nasdaq remains 20% below its high-water mark of 5049 set on March 10, 2000.
The recovery of the Nasdaq has been a complex tale of creative destruction, where old companies that once fueled the index have been pushed aside by new players. Factors include:
• The advent of non-tech. The words Nasdaq and technology were practically synonymous in 2000. But that largely changed after the tech bubble burst. Now, non-tech stocks are playing a more significant role. Tech is still critical for the Nasdaq, accounting for 42% of the index's market value. But that's down from 51% in March 2000, according to Nasdaq OMX, the company that owns and operates the exchange. And the supply of new stocks is coming from other industries. So far this year, technology trails health care and financials as the industries generating the most IPOs.
• The rise of new players. Back in 2000, Microsoft, Cisco Systems, Intel, Oracle and Sun accounted for 8.9%, 8.5%, 7.1%, 3.6% and 2.6%, respectively, of the value of the Nasdaq composite. Today, companies that were jus! t startin! g out or didn't even exist — think Google, Amazon and Facebook — are in the top 10, accounting for 4.7%, 2.7% and 1.5% of Nasdaq's value. Microsoft, Cisco and Intel's weight has fallen sharply. Apple, which wasn't in the top 10 in 2000, is a behemoth at 7.9%.
• More room at the top. The top 10 most valuable stocks in the Nasdaq in 2000 accounted for 40% of the Nasdaq composite value, Nasdaq OMX says. Today, the top 10 most valuable stocks command 32% of the index' value.
So is the Nasdaq enjoying a long overdue catch-up with the rest of the market, or is the broad market overpriced, with the Nasdaq being pulled along for the ride? Many investors soured on Nasdaq stocks after Apple went from a darling stock trading at more than $700 a share to crater to $400 in April, says Fane Lozman, a trader at market research firm Scanshift.com. But for now, investors are happy to jump back in.
"The Apple flush scared away investors," Lozman says. "But things have calmed down, and memories are short."
And the changing face of its leadership shows the Nasdaq's rise is being powered by fresh developments rather than a bounce back of failed ideas, says Doug Sandler of RiverFront Investment Group. "The reality is that the only thing that's the same from Nasdaq 4000 in 1999 and Nasdaq 4000 in 2013," he says, "is the number 4000."