Connect with us

Business

An Algorithm Told Police She Was Safe. Then Her Husband Killed Her.

Published

on

An Algorithm Told Police She Was Safe. Then Her Husband Killed Her.

In a small apartment outside Madrid on Jan. 11, 2022, an argument over household chores turned violent when Lobna Hemid’s husband smashed a wooden shoe rack and used one of the broken pieces to beat her. Her screams were heard by neighbors. Their four children, ages 6 to 12, were also home.

Ms. Hemid’s husband of more than a decade, Bouthaer el Banaisati, regularly punched and kicked her, she later told the police. He also called her a “whore,” “disgusting” and “worthless,” according to the police report.

Before Ms. Hemid left the station that night, the police had to determine if she was in danger of being attacked again and needed support. A police officer clicked through 35 yes or no questions — Was a weapon used? Were there economic problems? Has the aggressor shown controlling behaviors?to feed into an algorithm called VioGén that would help generate an answer.

VioGén produced a score:

low risk Lobna Hemid

Advertisement

2022 Madrid

The police accepted the software’s judgment and Ms. Hemid went home with no further protection. Mr. el Banaisati, who was imprisoned that night, was released the next day. Seven weeks later, he fatally stabbed Ms. Hemid several times in the chest and abdomen before killing himself. She was 32 years old.

A photo of Lobna Hemid on the phone of a friend. She was killed by her husband in 2022.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

Spain has become dependent on an algorithm to combat gender violence, with the software so woven into law enforcement that it is hard to know where its recommendations end and human decision-making begins. At its best, the system has helped police protect vulnerable women and, overall, has reduced the number of repeat attacks in domestic violence cases. But the reliance on VioGén has also resulted in victims, whose risk levels are miscalculated, getting attacked again — sometimes leading to fatal consequences.

Spain now has 92,000 active cases of gender violence victims who were evaluated by VioGén, with most of them — 83 percent — classified as facing little risk of being hurt by their abuser again. Yet roughly 8 percent of women who the algorithm found to be at negligible risk and 14 percent at low risk have reported being harmed again, according to Spain’s Interior Ministry, which oversees the system.

At least 247 women have also been killed by their current or former partner since 2007 after being assessed by VioGén, according to government figures. While that is a tiny fraction of gender violence cases, it points to the algorithm’s flaws. The New York Times found that in a judicial review of 98 of those homicides, 55 of the slain women were scored by VioGén as negligible or low risk for repeat abuse.

How the Risk Levels of 98 Women Were Classified

Extreme

Advertisement

High

Medium

Low

Negligible

Advertisement

Source: Spanish General Council of the Judiciary Note: Data from 2010 to 2022. Data from 2016 to 2018 is unavailable. By Alice Fang

Spanish police are trained to overrule VioGén’s recommendations depending on the evidence, but accept the risk scores about 95 percent of the time, officials said. Judges can also use the results when considering requests for restraining orders and other protective measures.

“Women are falling through the cracks,” said Susana Pavlou, director of the Mediterranean Institute of Gender Studies, who coauthored a European Union report about VioGén and other police efforts to fight violence against women. The algorithm “kind of absolves the police of any responsibility of assessing the situation and what the victim may need.”

Spain exemplifies how governments are turning to algorithms to make societal decisions, a global trend that is expected to grow with the rise of artificial intelligence. In the United States, algorithms help determine prison sentences, set police patrols and identify children at risk of abuse. In the Netherlands and Britain, authorities have experimented with algorithms to predict who may become criminals and to identify people who may be committing welfare fraud.

Few of the programs have such life or death consequences as VioGén. But victims interviewed by The Times rarely knew about the role the algorithm played in their cases. The government also has not released comprehensive data about the system’s effectiveness and has refused to make the algorithm available for outside audit.

Advertisement

VioGén was created to be an unbiased tool to aid police with limited resources identify and protect women most at risk of being assaulted again. The technology was meant to create efficiencies by helping police prioritize the most urgent cases, while focusing less on those calculated by the algorithm as lower risk. Victims classified as higher risk get more protection, including regular patrols by their home, access to a shelter and police monitoring of their abuser’s movements. Those with lower scores get less support.

In a statement, the Interior Ministry defended VioGén and said the government was the “first to carry out self-criticism” when mistakes occur. It said homicide was so rare that it was difficult to accurately predict, but added it was an “incontestable fact” that VioGén has helped reduce violence against women.

Since 2007, about 0.03 percent of Spain’s 814,000 reported victims of gender violence have been killed after being assessed by VioGén, the ministry said. During that time, repeat attacks have fallen to roughly 15 percent of all gender violence cases from 40 percent, according to government figures.

“If it weren’t for this, we would have more homicides and gender-based violence,” said Juan José López Ossorio, a psychologist who helped create VioGén and works for the Interior Ministry.

Juan José López Ossorio, a government official who helped create the VioGén system.

Advertisement

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Yet victims and their families are grappling with the consequences when VioGén gets it wrong.

“Technology is fine, but sometimes it’s not and then it’s fatal,” said Jesús Melguizo, Ms. Hemid’s brother-in-law, who is a guardian for two of her children. “The computer has no heart.”

‘Effective but not perfect’

Advertisement

VioGén started with a question: Can police predict an assault before it happens?

After Spain passed a law in 2004 to address violence against women, the government assembled experts in statistics, psychology and other fields to find an answer. Their goal was to create a statistical model to identify women most at risk of abuse and to outline a standardized response to protect them.

Some initial designs and research strategies for what became VioGén, including a decision tree and calibration techniques for predicting intimate partner homicides.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

“It would be a new guide for risk assessment in gender violence,” said Antonio Pueyo, a psychology professor at the University of Barcelona who later joined the effort.

The team took a similar approach to how insurance companies and banks predict the likelihood of future events, such as house fires or currency swings. They studied national crime statistics, police records and the work of researchers in Britain and Canada to find indicators that appeared to correlate with gender violence. Substance abuse, job loss and economic uncertainty were high on the list.

Then they came up with a questionnaire for victims so their answers could be compared with historical data. Police would fill in the answers after interviewing a victim, reviewing documentary evidence, speaking with witnesses and studying other information from government agencies. Answers to certain questions carried more weight than others, like if an abuser displayed suicidal tendencies or showed signs of jealousy.

These are some of the questions answered by women

6. In the last six months, has there been an escalation of aggression or threats?

YesNoN/A

Advertisement

26. Has the aggressor demonstrated addictive behaviors or substance abuse?

YesNoN/A

34. In the last six months, has the victim expressed to the aggressor her intention to sever their relationship?

Advertisement

YesNoN/A

The system produced a score for each victim: negligible risk, low risk, medium risk, high risk or extreme risk. A higher score would result in police patrols and the tracking of an aggressor’s movements. In extreme cases, police would assign 24-hour surveillance. Those with lower scores would receive fewer resources, mainly follow-up calls.

Predictive algorithms to address domestic violence have been used in parts of Britain, Canada, Germany and the United States, but not on such a national scale. In Spain, the Interior Ministry introduced VioGén everywhere but in the Catalonia region and Basque Country.

Law enforcement initially greeted the algorithm with skepticism, police and government officials told The Times, but it soon became a part of everyday police business.

Advertisement

Before VioGén, investigations were “based on the experience of the policeman,” said Mr. Pueyo, who remains affiliated with the program. “Now this is organized and guided by VioGén.”

VioGén is a source of impartial information, he said. If a woman attacked late at night was seen by a young police officer with little experience, VioGén could help detect the risk of future violence.

“It’s more efficient,” Mr. Pueyo said.

Over the years, VioGén has been refined and updated, including with metrics that are believed to better predict homicide. Police have also been required to conduct a follow-up risk assessment within 90 days of an attack.

But Spain’s faith in the system has surprised some experts. Juanjo Medina, a senior researcher at the University of Seville who has studied VioGén, said the system’s effectiveness remains unclear.

Advertisement

“We’re not good at forecasting the weather, let alone human behavior,” he said.

Francisco Javier Curto, a commander for the military police in Seville, said VioGén helps his teams prioritize, but requires close oversight. About 20 new cases of gender violence arrive every day, each requiring investigation. Providing police protection for every victim would be impossible given staff sizes and budgets.

“The system is effective but not perfect,” he said, adding that VioGén is “the best system that exists in the world right now.”

Francisco Javier Curto, a commander for the military police in Seville who oversees gender violence incidents in the province. VioGén is “the best system that exists in the world right now,” he said.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

José Iniesta, a civil guard in Alicante, a southeastern port city, said not enough of the police are trained to keep up with growing case loads. A leader in the United Association of Civil Guards, a union representing officers in rural areas, he said that outside of big cities, the police often must choose between addressing violence against women or other crimes.

Sindicato Unificado de Policía, a union that represents national police officers, said even the most effective technology cannot make up for a lack of trained experts. In some places, a police officer is assigned to work with more than 100 victims.

“Agents in many provinces are overwhelmed,” the union said in a statement.

When attacks happen again

Advertisement

The women who have been killed after being assessed by VioGén can be found across Spain.

One was Stefany González Escarraman, a 26-year-old living near Seville. In 2016, she went to the police after her husband punched her in the face and choked her. He threw objects at her, including a kitchen ladle that hit their 3-year-old child. After police interviewed Ms. Escarraman for about five hours, VioGén determined she had a negligible risk of being abused again.

negligible risk Stefany González Escarraman

2016 Seville

Advertisement

The next day, Ms. Escarraman, who had a swollen black eye, went to court for a restraining order against her husband. Judges can serve as a check on the VioGén system, with the ability to intervene in cases and provide protective measures. In Ms. Escarraman’s case, the judge denied a restraining order, citing VioGén’s risk score and her husband’s lack of criminal history.

Stefany González Escarraman, who was killed in 2016 by her husband. VioGén had scored her as negligible risk.

About a month later, Ms. Escarraman was stabbed by her husband multiple times in the heart in front of their children. In 2020, her family won a verdict against the state for failing to adequately measure the level of risk and provide sufficient protection.

“If she had been given the help, maybe she would be alive,” said Williams Escarraman, Ms. Escarraman’s brother.

Advertisement

In 2021, Eva Jaular, who lived in Liaño in northern Spain, was slain by her former boyfriend after being classified as low risk by VioGén. He also killed their 11-month-old daughter. Six weeks earlier, he had jabbed a knife into a couch cushion next to where Ms. Jaular sat and said, “look how well it sticks,” according to a police report.

low risk Eva Jaular

2021 Liaño

Since 2007, 247 of the 990 women killed in Spain by a current or former partner were previously scored by VioGén, according to the Interior Ministry. The other victims had not been previously reported to the police, so were not in the system. The ministry declined to disclose the VioGén risk scores of the 247 who were killed.

Advertisement

The Times instead analyzed reports from a Spanish judicial agency, released almost every year from 2010 to 2022, which included information about the risk scores of 98 women who were later killed. Of those, 55 had been classified as negligible risk or low risk.

In a statement, the Interior Ministry said that analyzing the risk scores of homicide victims doesn’t provide an accurate picture of VioGén’s effectiveness because some homicides happened more than a year after the first assessment, while others were committed by a different partner.

Why the algorithm incorrectly classifies some women varies and isn’t always clear, but one reason may be the poor quality of information fed into the system. VioGén is ideally suited for cases when a woman, in the moments after being attacked, can provide complete information to an experienced police officer who has time to fully investigate the incident.

That does not always happen. Fear, shame, economic dependency, immigration status and other factors can lead a victim to withhold information. Police are also often squeezed for time and may not fully investigate.

Elisabeth, a lawyer, is a survivor of gender violence who now advocates for other victims who face institutional mistreatment in Spain.

Advertisement

Ana María Arévalo Gosen for The New York Times

“If we already enter erroneous information into the system, how can we expect the system to give us a good result?” said Elisabeth, a victim who now works as a gender violence lawyer. She spoke on the condition her full name not be used, for fear of retaliation by her former partner.

Luz, a woman from a village in southern Spain, said she was repeatedly labeled low risk after attacks by her partner because she was afraid and ashamed to provide complete information to the police, some of whom she knew personally. She got her risk score increased to extreme only after working with a lawyer specializing in gender violence cases, leading to round-the-clock police protection.

extreme risk Luz

Advertisement

2019 Southern Spain

“We women keep a lot of things silent not because we want to lie but out of fear,” said Luz, who spoke on the condition her full name not be used for fear of retaliation by her attacker, who was imprisoned. “VioGén would be good if there were qualified people who had all the necessary tools to carry it out.”

Luz, with her son, said she was labeled lower risk because she was afraid and ashamed to provide complete information about her partner’s abuse to police.

Ana María Arévalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

Victim groups said that psychologists or other trained specialists should lead the questioning of victims rather than the police. Some have urged the government to mandate that victims be allowed to be accompanied by somebody they trust to help ensure full information is given to authorities, something that is now not allowed in all areas.

“It’s not easy to report a person you’ve loved,” said María, a victim from Granada in southern Spain, who was labeled medium risk after her partner attacked her with a dumbbell. She asked that her full name not be published for fear of retaliation by him.

medium risk María

2023 Granada

Advertisement

Ujué Agudo, a Spanish researcher studying the influence of artificial intelligence on human decisions, said technology has a role in solving societal problems. But it could reduce the responsibility of humans to approving the work of a machine, rather than conducting the necessary work themselves.

“If the system succeeds, it’s a success of the system. If the system fails, it’s a human error that they aren’t monitoring properly,” said Ms. Agudo, a co-director of Bikolabs, a Spanish civil society group. A better approach, she said, was for people “to say what their decision is before seeing what the A.I. thinks.”

Spanish officials are exploring incorporating A.I. into VioGén so it can pull data from different sources and learn more on its own. Mr. Ossorio, a creator of VioGén who works for the Interior Ministry, said the tools can be applied to other areas, including workplace harassment and hate crimes.

The systems will never be perfect, he said, but neither is human judgment. “Whatever we do, we always fail,” he said. “It’s unsolvable problems.”

Advertisement

This month, the Spanish government called an emergency meeting after three women were killed by former partners within a 24-hour span. One victim, a 30-year-old from central Spain, had been classified by VioGén as low risk.

At a news conference, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, the interior minister, said he still had “absolute confidence” in the system.

‘Always cheerful’

A memorial of roses and eucalyptus adorns a lamppost at the entrance to the street where Ms. Hemid lived.

Ana Maria Arevalo Gosen for The New York Times

Advertisement

Ms. Hemid, who was killed outside Madrid in 2022, was born in rural Morocco. She was 14 when she was introduced at a family wedding to Mr. el Banaisati, who was 10 years older than her. She was 17 when they married. They later moved to Spain so he could pursue steadier work.

Ms. Hemid was outgoing and gregarious, often seen racing to get her children to school on time, friends said. She learned to speak Spanish and sometimes joined children playing soccer in the park.

“She was always cheerful,” said Amelia Franas, a friend whose children went to the same school as Ms. Hemid’s children.

Few knew that abuse was a fixture of Ms. Hemid’s marriage. She spoke little about her home life, friends said, and never called the police or reported Mr. el Banaisati before the January 2022 incident.

Advertisement

VioGén is intended to identify danger signs that humans may overlook, but in Ms. Hemid’s case, it appears that police missed some clues. Her neighbors told The Times they were not interviewed, nor were administrators at her children’s school, who said they had seen signs of trouble.

Family members said Mr. el Banaisati had a life-threatening form of cancer that made him behave erratically. Many blamed underlying discrimination in Spain’s criminal system that overlooks violence against immigrant women, especially Muslims.

Police haven’t released a copy of the assessment that produced Ms. Hemid’s low risk score from VioGén. A copy of a separate police report shared with The Times noted that Ms. Hemid was tired during questioning and wanted to end the interview to get home.

A few days after the January 2022 attack, Ms. Hemid won a restraining order against her husband. But Mr. el Banaisati largely ignored the order, family and friends said. He moved into an apartment less than 500 meters from where Ms. Hemid lived and continued threatening her.

Mr. Melguizo, her brother-in-law, said he appealed to Ms. Hemid’s assigned public lawyer for help, but was told the police “won’t do anything, it has a low risk score.”

Advertisement

The day after Ms. Hemid was stabbed to death, she had a court date scheduled to officially file for divorce.

Business

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

Published

on

Video: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

new video loaded: The Web of Companies Owned by Elon Musk

In mapping out Elon Musk’s wealth, our investigation found that Mr. Musk is behind more than 90 companies in Texas. Kirsten Grind, a New York Times Investigations reporter, explains what her team found.

By Kirsten Grind, Melanie Bencosme, James Surdam and Sean Havey

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Business

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Published

on

Commentary: How Trump helped foreign markets outperform U.S. stocks during his first year in office

Trump has crowed about the gains in the U.S. stock market during his term, but in 2025 investors saw more opportunity in the rest of the world.

If you’re a stock market investor you might be feeling pretty good about how your portfolio of U.S. equities fared in the first year of President Trump’s term.

All the major market indices seemed to be firing on all cylinders, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 index gaining 17.9% through the full year.

But if you’re the type of investor who looks for things to regret, pay no attention to the rest of the world’s stock markets. That’s because overseas markets did better than the U.S. market in 2025 — a lot better. The MSCI World ex-USA index — that is, all the stock markets except the U.S. — gained more than 32% last year, nearly double the percentage gains of U.S. markets.

That’s a major departure from recent trends. Since 2013, the MSCI US index had bested the non-U.S. index every year except 2017 and 2022, sometimes by a wide margin — in 2024, for instance, the U.S. index gained 24.6%, while non-U.S. markets gained only 4.7%.

Advertisement

The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade.

— Katie Martin, Financial Times

Broken down into individual country markets (also by MSCI indices), in 2025 the U.S. ranked 21st out of 23 developed markets, with only New Zealand and Denmark doing worse. Leading the pack were Austria and Spain, with 86% gains, but superior records were turned in by Finland, Ireland and Hong Kong, with gains of 50% or more; and the Netherlands, Norway, Britain and Japan, with gains of 40% or more.

Investment analysts cite several factors to explain this trend. Judging by traditional metrics such as price/earnings multiples, the U.S. markets have been much more expensive than those in the rest of the world. Indeed, they’re historically expensive. The Standard & Poor’s 500 index traded in 2025 at about 23 times expected corporate earnings; the historical average is 18 times earnings.

Advertisement

Investment managers also have become nervous about the concentration of market gains within the U.S. technology sector, especially in companies associated with artificial intelligence R&D. Fears that AI is an investment bubble that could take down the S&P’s highest fliers have investors looking elsewhere for returns.

But one factor recurs in almost all the market analyses tracking relative performance by U.S. and non-U.S. markets: Donald Trump.

Investors started 2025 with optimism about Trump’s influence on trading opportunities, given his apparent commitment to deregulation and his braggadocio about America’s dominant position in the world and his determination to preserve, even increase it.

That hasn’t been the case for months.

”The Trump trade is dead. Long live the anti-Trump trade,” Katie Martin of the Financial Times wrote this week. “Wherever you look in financial markets, you see signs that global investors are going out of their way to avoid Donald Trump’s America.”

Advertisement

Two Trump policy initiatives are commonly cited by wary investment experts. One, of course, is Trump’s on-and-off tariffs, which have left investors with little ability to assess international trade flows. The Supreme Court’s invalidation of most Trump tariffs and the bellicosity of his response, which included the immediate imposition of new 10% tariffs across the board and the threat to increase them to 15%, have done nothing to settle investors’ nerves.

Then there’s Trump’s driving down the value of the dollar through his agitation for lower interest rates, among other policies. For overseas investors, a weaker dollar makes U.S. assets more expensive relative to the outside world.

It would be one thing if trade flows and the dollar’s value reflected economic conditions that investors could themselves parse in creating a picture of investment opportunities. That’s not the case just now. “The current uncertainty is entirely man-made (largely by one orange-hued man in particular) but could well continue at least until the US mid-term elections in November,” Sam Burns of Mill Street Research wrote on Dec. 29.

Trump hasn’t been shy about trumpeting U.S. stock market gains as emblems of his policy wisdom. “The stock market has set 53 all-time record highs since the election,” he said in his State of the Union address Tuesday. “Think of that, one year, boosting pensions, 401(k)s and retirement accounts for the millions and the millions of Americans.”

Trump asserted: “Since I took office, the typical 401(k) balance is up by at least $30,000. That’s a lot of money. … Because the stock market has done so well, setting all those records, your 401(k)s are way up.”

Advertisement

Trump’s figure doesn’t conform to findings by retirement professionals such as the 401(k) overseers at Bank of America. They reported that the average account balance grew by only about $13,000 in 2025. I asked the White House for the source of Trump’s claim, but haven’t heard back.

Interpreting stock market returns as snapshots of the economy is a mug’s game. Despite that, at her recent appearance before a House committee, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi tried to deflect questions about her handling of the Jeffrey Epstein records by crowing about it.

“The Dow is over 50,000 right now, she declared. “Americans’ 401(k)s and retirement savings are booming. That’s what we should be talking about.”

I predicted that the administration would use the Dow industrial average’s break above 50,000 to assert that “the overall economy is firing on all cylinders, thanks to his policies.” The Dow reached that mark on Feb. 6. But Feb. 11, the day of Bondi’s testimony, was the last day the index closed above 50,000. On Thursday, it closed at 49,499.50, or about 1.4% below its Feb. 10 peak close of 50,188.14.

To use a metric suggested by economist Justin Wolfers of the University of Michigan, if you invested $48,488 in the Dow on the day Trump took office last year, when the Dow closed at 48,448 points, you would have had $50,000 on Feb. 6. That’s a gain of about 3.2%. But if you had invested the same amount in the global stock market not including the U.S. (based on the MSCI World ex-USA index), on that same day you would have had nearly $60,000. That’s a gain of nearly 24%.

Advertisement

Broader market indices tell essentially the same story. From Jan. 17, 2025, the last day before Trump’s inauguration, through Thursday’s close, the MSCI US stock index gained a cumulative 16.3%. But the world index minus the U.S. gained nearly 42%.

The gulf between U.S. and non-U.S. performance has continued into the current year. The S&P 500 has gained about 0.74% this year through Wednesday, while the MSCI World ex-USA index has gained about 8.9%. That’s “the best start for a calendar year for global stocks relative to the S&P 500 going back to at least 1996,” Morningstar reports.

It wouldn’t be unusual for the discrepancy between the U.S. and global markets to shrink or even reverse itself over the course of this year.

That’s what happened in 2017, when overseas markets as tracked by MSCI beat the U.S. by more than three percentage points, and 2022, when global markets lost money but U.S. markets underperformed the rest of the world by more than five percentage points.

Economic conditions change, and often the stock markets march to their own drummers. The one thing less likely to change is that Trump is set to remain president until Jan. 20, 2029. Make your investment bets accordingly.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Published

on

How the S&P 500 Stock Index Became So Skewed to Tech and A.I.

Nvidia, the chipmaker that became the world’s most valuable public company two years ago, was alone worth more than $4.75 trillion as of Thursday morning. Its value, or market capitalization, is more than double the combined worth of all the companies in the energy sector, including oil giants like Exxon Mobil and Chevron.

The chipmaker’s market cap has swelled so much recently, it is now 20 percent greater than the sum of all of the companies in the materials, utilities and real estate sectors combined.

Advertisement

What unifies these giant tech companies is artificial intelligence. Nvidia makes the hardware that powers it; Microsoft, Apple and others have been making big bets on products that people can use in their everyday lives.

But as worries grow over lavish spending on A.I., as well as the technology’s potential to disrupt large swaths of the economy, the outsize influence that these companies exert over markets has raised alarms. They can mask underlying risks in other parts of the index. And if a handful of these giants falter, it could mean widespread damage to investors’ portfolios and retirement funds in ways that could ripple more broadly across the economy.

Advertisement

The dynamic has drawn comparisons to past crises, notably the dot-com bubble. Tech companies also made up a large share of the stock index then — though not as much as today, and many were not nearly as profitable, if they made money at all.

Advertisement

How the current moment compares with past pre-crisis moments

To understand how abnormal and worrisome this moment might be, The New York Times analyzed data from S&P Dow Jones Indices that compiled the market values of the companies in the S&P 500 in December 1999 and August 2007. Each date was chosen roughly three months before a downturn to capture the weighted breakdown of the index before crises fully took hold and values fell.

Advertisement

The companies that make up the index have periodically cycled in and out, and the sectors were reclassified over the last two decades. But even after factoring in those changes, the picture that emerges is a market that is becoming increasingly one-sided.

In December 1999, the tech sector made up 26 percent of the total.

In August 2007, just before the Great Recession, it was only 14 percent.

Advertisement

Today, tech is worth a third of the market, as other vital sectors, such as energy and those that include manufacturing, have shrunk.

Since then, the huge growth of the internet, social media and other technologies propelled the economy.

Advertisement

Now, never has so much of the market been concentrated in so few companies. The top 10 make up almost 40 percent of the S&P 500.

Advertisement

How much of the S&P 500 is occupied by the top 10 companies

With greater concentration of wealth comes greater risk. When so much money has accumulated in just a handful of companies, stock trading can be more volatile and susceptible to large swings. One day after Nvidia posted a huge profit for its most recent quarter, its stock price paradoxically fell by 5.5 percent. So far in 2026, more than a fifth of the stocks in the S&P 500 have moved by 20 percent or more. Companies and industries that are seen as particularly prone to disruption by A.I. have been hard hit.

Advertisement

The volatility can be compounded as everyone reorients their businesses around A.I, or in response to it.

The artificial intelligence boom has touched every corner of the economy. As data centers proliferate to support massive computation, the utilities sector has seen huge growth, fueled by the energy demands of the grid. In 2025, companies like NextEra and Exelon saw their valuations surge.

Advertisement

The industrials sector, too, has undergone a notable shift. General Electric was its undisputed heavyweight in 1999 and 2007, but the recent explosion in data center construction has evened out growth in the sector. GE still leads today, but Caterpillar is a very close second. Caterpillar, which is often associated with construction, has seen a spike in sales of its turbines and power-generation equipment, which are used in data centers.

One large difference between the big tech companies now and their counterparts during the dot-com boom is that many now earn money. A lot of the well-known names in the late 1990s, including Pets.com, had soaring valuations and little revenue, which meant that when the bubble popped, many companies quickly collapsed.

Advertisement

Nvidia, Apple, Alphabet and others generate hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue each year.

And many of the biggest players in artificial intelligence these days are private companies. OpenAI, Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public later this year, which could further tilt the market dynamic toward tech and A.I.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Methodology

Sector values reflect the GICS code classification system of companies in the S&P 500. As changes to the GICS system took place from 1999 to now, The New York Times reclassified all companies in the index in 1999 and 2007 with current sector values. All monetary figures from 1999 and 2007 have been adjusted for inflation.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending