The SpaceX Inclusion Part 2: Did the Mechanics Play Out?Micro E-mini Nasdaq-100 Index FuturesCME_MINI_DL:MNQ1!mintdotfinanceEarlier this year, we published a pre-event analysis examining how SpaceX's anticipated Nasdaq listing would stress-test the mechanics of passive index rebalancing. With SpaceX now listed, the June 22 quarterly rebalance complete, and the primary Nasdaq-100 inclusion confirmed for July 7, this paper revisits the story with current market data, quantifying the updated forced-buying and outlining how participants can use CME Nasdaq futures and options to construct defined-risk positions ahead of the final inclusion leg on 07/July. The Blockbuster IPO On June 12, 2026, SpaceX priced its IPO at $135 per share against a $1.75 trillion valuation and immediately surged 27% on its first day of trading. By mid-June, the stock had climbed as high as $225.64 before settling back to approximately $153.23 as of June 29, a market capitalisation of roughly $2.02 trillion. The IPO was initially structured with a 4.3% public float, but with SPCX trading sharply above its IPO price within days of listing, underwriters fully exercised the greenshoe (overallotment) option, purchasing an additional 83.3 million shares (15% of the original offering), and increasing total IPO proceeds from $75 billion to $85.7 billion. This exercise also lifted the public float from 4.3% to approximately 4.8% of the 13.11 billion total shares outstanding. In addition, the early fast-track absorption has already begun. Under the revised Russell 1000 eligibility rules, SpaceX qualified for inclusion just five trading days after its listing, making it one of the fastest index entries in market history. MSCI separately confirmed early inclusion under its own fast-track methodology around the same window. Both events triggered discrete waves of mandatory programmatic buying, compressing liquidity against the same structurally thin 4.8% public float. The primary event, however, is still a week away. The Nasdaq-100, which commands approximately $1.4 trillion in tracking AUM across ETFs, mutual funds, futures, structured products, and annuities, formally adds SpaceX effective July 7, and it is this wave that is expected to carry the bulk of the remaining forced buying. The Updated Model: How the Numbers Have Shifted Our May pre-event model was built on a $1.75 trillion valuation, a 4.3% float, and a 3× Nasdaq multiplier, yielding an estimated entry weight of 0.534%. With SpaceX's market cap now settled at $2.02 trillion, we have refreshed the model against live QQQ constituent data as of June 27. The mechanics, however, are unchanged. Under Nasdaq's rules, SpaceX's raw float of approximately $96.96 billion ($2.02T x 4.8%) is multiplied by three to arrive at an effective float cap of $290.88 billion. This generates a revised entry weight of 0.724%, meaningfully higher than our pre-event estimate, owing to the post-IPO appreciation in SpaceX's market cap and more share issuance at IPO. The Live Tape On its very first day of trading, shares worth $85.3 billion changed hands, i.e. almost the entire float was traded in a single session. Upon listing, the stock touched an all-time-high of $225.64 on June 16, a 67% gain in four trading days, before collapsing to an all-time low of $147.11 on June 22, erasing $620 billion in market cap in a single week. As of June 29, it trades at $155, about 15% above its IPO price. Having said that, the chart below shows why the rally was not how it appeared. On June 16, the day SPCX closed at $201.80, just hours after touching its all-time high of $225.64, the Cumulative Volume Delta (CVD) had already flipped to −3.31 million shares. Sellers were the aggressive party at the very moment the stock looked strongest. The latter pattern held for four consecutive sessions through June 22, with CVD reaching a trough of −6.82 million on the day the stock hit its all-time low. This time, the selling pressure was accelerating even as the price continued to collapse. Two further details underscore just how structurally thin this market was: 1. Over 65% of day-one volume was executed off-exchange. Dark pools, internalisers, and off-exchange venues absorbed $56.2 billion of the $85.3 billion total, leaving lit venues to handle only $29.1 billion. The official price that index funds will be forced to reference on July 7 is therefore being set largely in the dark. 2. 81.3% of all individual transactions were odd lots (orders of fewer than 100 shares), which accounted for only 21.7% of the actual share volume. The vast majority of the price impact, on the other hand, was driven by a small number of large institutional-sized orders arriving in a market with almost no resting depth to absorb them. Herein lies the implication for the July 7 rebalancing; passive funds must execute billions in mandatory and price-insensitive orders into a stock that has already demonstrated it has essentially no standing liquidity. The Float Scarcity Problem and the MOC Flashpoint With over 95% of SpaceX shares locked up by insiders and early private investors, the Nasdaq-100 tracking capital must compete for a structurally rationed public float. That said, 30% of the public float could end up being passively owned after the last of the three potential index inclusion tranches on 07/July. Source: Intropic The unlock schedule below illustrates why the scarcity problem is not short-lived. Institutional and VC holders, employees, and Alphabet face staggered unlock windows through the remainder of 2026, with the largest single unlock event, i.e. Elon Musk's personal holdings, arriving only at Day 366, in June 2027. Source: Tokenomist Between now and then, the float expands in discrete, calendar-driven steps, each of which introduces a potential supply overhang at a moment when passive demand has already been largely front-run. This collision between price-agnostic programmatic buying and severely constrained supply will be most acute during the Market-On-Close (MOC) auction on July 7. Index funds executing on that day face simultaneous forced selling pressure across all 101 incumbents, and forced buying against a stock that has already demonstrated extreme intraday volatility. Managing the Inclusion Risk The mechanical predictability of this event creates distinct opportunities for participants to manage concentration risk without taking any directional view on SpaceX itself. Long MES/Short MNQ Spread The starkest expression of the index methodology divergence is a relative-value spread between the Micro E-mini S&P 500 (MES) and the Micro E-mini Nasdaq-100 (MNQ). The S&P 500 has explicitly declined to fast-track SpaceX, deferring inclusion until GAAP profitability requirements are met, which, at the earliest, would be in 2027. S&P 500 constituents currently bear zero mechanical selling pressure from this rebalancing, and the spread simultaneously captures the divergence between the two benchmarks. The spread is also at parity as of now, signalling potential widening in the near-term. Traders can isolate this structural divergence using a defined-risk spread, by buying slightly out-of-the-money puts on the Micro E-mini Nasdaq-100 (MNQ) options and calls on the S&P 500 (MES). The maximum risk is capped strictly to the premium paid, while eliminating the margin-maintenance risk of a naked futures spread. Both legs expire July 17, one week after the rebalancing date, keeping theta decay contained to the event window. Leg 1: Buy 2 x MNQ 30,000 Puts 437 pts × $2 × 2 contracts = $1,748 Leg 2: Buy 3 × MES 7,575 Calls Last: 63.9 pts × $5 × 3 contracts = $958 Total Premium Paid (Maximum Loss): $2706 The spread is nearly dollar neutral with a 1.07 ratio. Source: CME QuikStrike The MNQ options multiplier is $2 per point versus $5 for MES, and both trade on CME Globex with near-continuous liquidity from Sunday evening through Friday afternoon. The two option charts illustrate the entry levels for both legs, along with the breakeven point and the best/worst case scenarios. Source: CME QuikStrike This content is sponsored. MARKET DATA CME Real-time Market Data helps identify trading setups and more effectively express market views. If you have futures in your trading portfolio, you can check out on CME Group data plans available that suit your trading needs at tradingview.com/cme. DISCLAIMER This case study is for educational purposes only and does not constitute investment recommendations or advice. Nor are they used to promote any specific products, or services. Trading or investment ideas cited here are for illustration only, as an integral part of a case study to demonstrate the fundamental concepts in risk management or trading under the market scenarios being discussed.