The Nasdaq has risen for 11 consecutive days! Why haven't the seven sisters returned together?

Written by: DaiDai, Frank, MSX Maitong

In 15 days, the Nasdaq experienced a rollercoaster ride.

At the end of March, there was still significant disagreement in the market regarding the seven sisters, with high valuation pressures yet to be cleared, and it was difficult for funds to truly move away from core technology; by April 15, the Nasdaq Composite Index had risen for 11 consecutive trading days, breaking the longest streak of gains since November 2021, and the S&P 500 also hit a historic high.

If we only look at the indices, this seems like a familiar story of a tech stock rebound, but a closer look reveals that the drivers of this upward movement are far more than just the tech stocks themselves—expectations of easing in the Middle East, lower-than-expected PPI data, and strong performance in the early stages of earnings season all contributed simultaneously. In other words, this is not just a rebound driven by sentiment, but a simultaneous occurrence of index repair, a rise in risk appetite, and a repricing of earnings expectations.

What’s more noteworthy is that the performance within the seven sisters is not consistent; some have already returned to trend, some are catching up, and some still have not shown a clear trend. MSX had previously anticipated in its Q2 outlook that this round of the seven sisters might not return together, and it was likely that a repair sequence would emerge (see extended reading “Oil Prices Surge, Interest Rates Hard to Lower, Seven Sisters Stagnate: What Main Lines to Watch for Excess Returns in Q2 U.S. Stocks?”), breaking it down into three layers: Alphabet (GOOGL.M), Amazon (AMZN.M), and NVIDIA (NVDA.M) are more suitable as priority repair candidates; Microsoft (MSFT.M), Apple (AAPL.M), and Meta (META.M) are more suitable for continued observation; Tesla (TSLA.M) remains highly volatile and strongly event-driven.

This judgment seemed quite restrained at the time, even lacking a strong viewpoint.

But now, what the market has played out is precisely this rhythm of "first layering, then expanding."

1. Which batch returns first, and why?

Returning to the end of March, there was significant disagreement in the market regarding the seven sisters.

On one hand, there were concerns about unresolved high valuation pressures, while on the other hand, it was difficult for funds to truly move away from core tech assets. The most concentrated discussion at the time was "Will big tech return?" In hindsight, this question itself was too broad; the real question was never "Will they return?" but rather "Who returns first, and on what basis?"

And half a month later, the answer has already been written on the market.

Looking at the performance from the end of March to April 15, Alphabet (GOOGL.M), Amazon (AMZN.M), Meta (META.M), and NVIDIA (NVDA.M) led in gains, followed by Microsoft (MSFT.M) and Apple (AAPL.M), while Tesla (TSLA.M) lagged significantly, further validating that this is not a period of simultaneous rises and falls, but rather a layered repair ranking.

Among those that repaired first, Alphabet (GOOGL.M), Amazon (AMZN.M), and NVIDIA (NVDA.M) each have different logics, but share a common point: they made the market believe earlier that "investment can still yield growth":

• The repair logic for Alphabet (GOOGL.M) is the clearest: the cash flow resilience of its core advertising business provides support for valuation bottoms, while AI's penetration into search and cloud services has allowed the market to see the continuation of the growth narrative, purely based on the verifiability of fundamentals, regaining trust from funds first;
• NVIDIA (NVDA.M) needs little explanation: as long as AI remains the main line of this tech cycle, NVIDIA will always be the core anchor. The market's debate over it has never been about "Does AI need computing power?" but rather "How long can this growth rate be maintained?" Therefore, at least at this stage, whether it’s the capital expenditure plans of cloud vendors or the demand signals on both training and inference ends, they are still supporting its repair logic;
• The changes at Amazon (AMZN.M) are worth examining separately: in this round, the market's patience with Amazon was not particularly high, mainly due to ongoing concerns about slowing e-commerce growth and persistent competitive pressures facing AWS. However, as the profitability of cloud services continues to improve, AI capital expenditures begin to correspond to visible revenue clues, and the overall logic of profitability realization is gradually being re-accepted, Amazon has entered the repair phase earlier than many expected. Thus, its return is not driven by a single catalyst, but rather multiple clues reaching the threshold for the market to reprice;

In other words, the market first repriced not necessarily the most "stable" names, but those that made funds believe earlier that "investment can continue to yield growth, and repair can continue to trend."

In this round of the seven sisters, who repairs first and who repairs later is fundamentally a competition of who regains the interpretative power first, rather than the strength of sentiment.

2. Repair is spreading, not narrowing

What’s even more noteworthy is that this round of repair has not been limited to just the first batch of names.

Originally more suitable for the continued observation list, Microsoft (MSFT.M), Apple (AAPL.M), and Meta (META.M) have now clearly caught up. In other words, the market is not just focusing on the few that moved out first, but is continuing to expand to the second layer after confirming the establishment of the first phase of repair.

This is actually very critical. Because if this were just a short-term emotional rebound, the market would typically be more rough: rising sharply together, then giving back together, with fast speed and limited sustainability. But the current market is not like that. It resembles a scenario where the index repairs first, followed by funds returning to core assets, and then continuing to rank within those core assets. Those whose performance can sustain valuations, and whose investments can continue to correspond to growth, will remain in the repair sequence; those that merely follow sentiment will fall behind in the differentiation.

Because of this, the current round of the seven sisters feels more like "order is being opened up," rather than "the whole group returns together."

A more critical signal is that this round of repair has not been limited to just the first batch of names.

Originally more suitable for the continued observation list, Microsoft (MSFT.M), Apple (AAPL.M), and Meta (META.M) have now clearly caught up, meaning that the market is not just focusing on the few that moved out first and then stopping there, but is continuing to expand to the second layer after confirming the establishment of the first phase of repair.

The significance of this is greater than it appears. Because if this were just a short-term emotional rebound, the market would typically be more rough: rising sharply together, then giving back together, with fast speed and limited sustainability, but the current structure is clearly not like that; it resembles a scenario where the index repairs first, followed by funds returning to core assets, and then continuing to rank within those core assets.

This means that those whose performance can sustain valuations, and whose investments can continue to correspond to growth, will remain in the repair sequence; those that merely follow sentiment will fall behind in the differentiation.

This is also why this round of market activity feels more like "repair diffusion," rather than "rebound conclusion," causing the seven sisters not to surge together and then quickly fizzle out, but to first repair the first batch, then diffuse to the second batch, and continue to filter who can remain in the trend during the diffusion process.

Objectively speaking, this structure itself indicates that the market is using a more patient approach to reprice core assets.

However, it must be mentioned that within this ranking, Tesla (TSLA.M) remains the most unique variable.

It certainly has elasticity and sufficient market attention. But so far, Tesla still resembles a high-volatility, strongly event-driven asset, rather than a core position that has stabilized back into the trend repair sequence. The pricing given to Tesla by the market is often based more on expected trading and event-driven factors—advancements in autonomous driving policies, Robotaxi timelines, Elon Musk's public statements—rather than stable profit realization.

This does not mean Tesla lacks trading value; on the contrary, its volatility itself is a trading opportunity. But its existence precisely illustrates that this round of the seven sisters has not returned in an orderly fashion; some have already returned to trend, some are catching up, and some still stand on the edge of the trend. To describe this round of the seven sisters as a "whole group return" is too coarse; understanding it as "the repair sequence has been opened up" is closer to the reality of the market.

3. How far can this round of repair go?

At this point, the more worthwhile discussion is not "Has this round risen too much?" but rather "Is there a foundation for this round of repair to continue to unfold?"

From the perspective of institutions, the answer leans positive. The BlackRock Investment Institute has upgraded its outlook on U.S. stocks from neutral to overweight, one reason being corporate earnings, especially the resilience of tech earnings; Citigroup has also upgraded U.S. stocks to overweight. The expected earnings growth rate for the S&P 500 in the first quarter has been revised up from 12.7% before the Middle East conflict to 13.9%. This means that what supports this round of repair is not just a warming of risk appetite, but more importantly, that earnings expectations themselves have not collapsed.

This is particularly crucial for the repair narrative of the seven sisters. Because the logic of this round of repair has never been based on sentiment or liquidity-driven factors, but rather on the fundamental judgment of whether "core tech companies can still realize profits." Continued upward revisions of earnings expectations mean that the foundation for repair is still there; whether it’s the first batch that has already completed repair or the second batch that is following, there is still room to continue operating along the trend.

Of course, variables have not disappeared. The IMF has downgraded the global growth outlook due to the Middle East conflict and rising energy prices, warning that if the conflict drags on and oil prices remain high, the global economy will be closer to adverse scenarios. In other words, the biggest disturbances to this round of market activity may not come from the internal logic of the seven sisters failing, but rather from external macro factors—oil prices, inflation, and geopolitics.

But at least so far, the market's answer has been relatively positive: the index repairs first, core tech undergoes layered repair, and after the first batch is completed, it expands outward, rather than the whole group surging and then quickly fizzling out. As long as the market continues to operate under this structure, this round feels more like an ongoing process rather than a story that is nearing its end.

In Conclusion

The Nasdaq's 10 consecutive gains are significant not just for how long the index has risen.

It more resembles the market using the price action itself to answer a fiercely debated question from the end of March: whether this round of the seven sisters is a complete return or if there will be a sequence of returns.

Now the answer is very clear.

To be honest, the market has never lacked for reviews or post-event summaries. What is truly scarce is whether anyone can highlight the key points when the disagreements are greatest, and that Q2 outlook from the end of March did not chase a more sensational or easily spread conclusion, but rather placed the most critical elements of this round of market activity upfront: the seven sisters will not return as a whole group; the market will first differentiate the repair sequence, and what truly determines the subsequent space is not who rebounds the fastest in the first wave, but who can continue to stand firm in the subsequent performance, trends, and risk appetite.

Ultimately, whether it’s the differentiation in earnings season or a new round of diffusion outside of core tech, what is truly worth paying attention to are those judgments that can clarify the market's key points earlier—rather than waiting until the market has completed its movement to provide a seemingly smooth explanation.

Before the next turning point arrives, let’s continue to highlight the market's key points and aim accurately.

Let’s encourage each other.