Nvidia to join Dow Jones Industrial Average, replacing Intel

Perceived relevance of the Dow vs other indices

• Many commenters see the DJIA as outdated, “symbolic” or even a “joke index” compared with market‑cap‑weighted indices like the S&P 500 and total-market funds.
• Others argue its utility is mostly historical: long time series for comparing today’s level to many decades ago.
• Several note that despite methodological flaws, the Dow’s performance is highly correlated with the S&P 500, and it still has strong psychological impact (“Dow down 1,500 points” feels dramatic).

Index methodology and construction

• The Dow is price‑weighted and includes only 30 hand‑picked companies, unlike broad, cap‑weighted indices.
• This method is described as a relic of a pre‑computer era when it was easy to compute by hand.
• Critics emphasize that price‑weighting gives arbitrary, often non‑economic weights; share splits and high nominal prices distort influence.
• Others note the Dow has always been curated and changed over time; it’s more like a “who’s who” or “country club” than a true market proxy.

Market and index‑fund implications of Nvidia replacing Intel

• Some expect flows from Dow‑tracking funds (e.g., DIA and similar) to sell Intel and buy Nvidia, creating modest price pressure.
• Others counter that assets tracking the DJIA are tiny compared with S&P 500/total‑market funds, so the effect on Nvidia/Intel is limited.
• There’s discussion of “index premium” and classic trades around index rebalancing, but also skepticism that this specific change is a major event.

Symbolism: Nvidia up, Intel down

• Many see the swap as emblematic: Nvidia as the ascendant, “wizzy” GPU/AI leader displacing an “old, lumbering” Intel.
• Some note both firms are decades old; the symbolism is about current momentum, not actual youth.

Why Nvidia dominates GPUs and AI

• Nvidia is credited with a long, sustained bet on CUDA and GPGPU (since mid‑2000s), plus a rich software ecosystem and libraries.
• Multiple commenters recount that competitors’ stacks (AMD, OpenCL, ROCm) were far harder to use, poorly documented, or unstable, driving researchers and industry to Nvidia.
• Others stress luck and timing: crypto mining, gaming booms, Covid shortages, and the LLM wave arriving just as Nvidia scaled up.

Debate: Did Nvidia “cause” modern AI/LLMs?

• One side argues that accessible Nvidia hardware and CUDA were essential enablers; without them, deep learning and LLMs would have been delayed or much smaller.
• Opponents say transformers originated elsewhere and could have run on other vendors’ GPUs; Nvidia was important but not uniquely indispensable.
• Consensus: Nvidia had a large influence, but the exact degree of causality is disputed.

Intel’s culture, misses, and potential

• Commenters recall an aborted attempt by Intel to buy Nvidia decades ago; many think Intel’s culture would have smothered Nvidia’s innovation.
• Intel is criticized for managerial dysfunction, NIH syndrome, and poor integration of past acquisitions (e.g., Altera, McAfee).
• Some still highlight Intel’s engineering depth and large server‑CPU share, suggesting it “might yet surprise,” while others doubt a true catch‑up in GPUs/AI.

Media coverage and incentives

• Several see heavy focus on the Dow as media theater rather than serious finance, tailored to casual audiences.
• Others nuance that some outlets operate as nonprofits or quasi‑philanthropic entities, with motives that include public service, ideology, or propaganda rather than pure profit.