Nasdaq 100: Selling Pressure Builds, but Breadth Remains Far Above Bear-Market Lows
The Nasdaq 100 declined 4.91% in the week ending November 6, 2026, as market breadth weakened, drawdowns deepened and heavy-volume declines outnumbered heavy-volume advances. Only 43.43% of eligible securities remained above their 200-day moving averages. This is a significant recent deterioration—but a much longer historical comparison shows that breadth remains well above the lows observed in major bear markets. Elevated selling pressure is not, by itself, evidence of a confirmed capitulation or market bottom.
1. Weekly losses reveal a divided market
Of the 101 securities in our monitored universe, 42 advanced and 59 declined. The median weekly return was −1.75%, compared with an average of −3.60%. The more negative mean reflects the influence of exceptionally large losses among some constituents.
Thirty-five securities fell at least 5%, 27 lost at least 10%, and ten declined by 20% or more. That concentration of severe weekly losses is unusual within our 155-week sample. It is not, however, a claim about the full history of the Nasdaq 100.
Price action was far from uniform: some securities recorded strong gains while parts of the technology complex sold off sharply. The distribution of individual returns therefore matters as much as the headline index movement.
2. Long-term breadth falls more than 18 percentage points in four weeks
The share of eligible securities trading above their 200-day moving averages fell from 61.62% four weeks earlier to 43.43% on November 6, a decline of 18.18 percentage points. Only 43 of the 99 securities with valid MA200 data remain above that reference.
Median distance to MA200 moved from +4.34% to −2.06% over the same period. Both measures point to a rapid loss of participation in the longer-term uptrend.
Within the 155-week dataset extending from November 24, 2023, the latest breadth reading is near the lower end of the observed distribution, as is the median distance to MA200. These are recent-sample comparisons, not multidecade historical records.
3. Longer history puts today's weakness in perspective
A separate long-run breadth series, with daily observations beginning in 1986, provides a more meaningful comparison with previous bear markets. Its November 6, 2026 reading is 43.00% above MA200—very close to our current weekly universe reading of 43.43%.
Earlier bear markets produced substantially lower participation. Selected recorded minima include approximately 8.06% in 2002, 1.43% in 2008, 12.50% in March 2020, and 7.45% in 2022. The April 2025 correction also reached approximately 19%.
| Selected historical episode | Recorded minimum above MA200 |
|---|---|
| 2002 bear market | 8.06% |
| 2008 financial crisis | 1.43% |
| March 2020 | 12.50% |
| 2022 bear market | 7.45% |
| April 2025 correction | 19.00% |
| November 6, 2026 · current observation | 43.00% |
Across comparable daily observations since 2000, approximately 15.6% had breadth at or below 43%; since 2010 the corresponding share was approximately 9.8%. By contrast, such readings have been considerably less common over our more recent three-year window. Historical coverage and constituent selection vary, so these comparisons are contextual rather than like-for-like replications.
4. More securities are trading far below their 52-week highs
Among the 99 securities with valid 52-week drawdown histories, 55.56% are more than 20% below their highest closing prices of the period, 33.33% are more than 30% below, 22.22% are more than 40% below, and 16.16% are more than 50% below.
The median 52-week drawdown has widened to −23.17% from −16.96% four weeks earlier. The share down more than 50% has increased from approximately 5.05% to 16.16% over the same span.
These figures document widening damage within the monitored universe. Their relative rarity is assessed against our 155-week dataset; we do not claim that these drawdowns are record extremes across decades without equivalent long-run individual-security data.
5. Volume rises sharply, with a clear downside imbalance
Median five-session relative trading volume reached 1.48× its preceding 60-session reference, up from 1.10× the prior week. This is near the upper end of the 155-week sample.
Forty-eight of 101 securities traded at relative volume of at least 1.5×. Of those, 33 fell and 15 rose over the matching return window.
Median 20-session signed-volume balance declined to −6.98% from −2.82% a week earlier; only 40.59% of companies maintained a positive signed-volume balance. These measurements are consistent with heavier downside participation. They do not directly identify institutional selling, forced liquidation or the motives of investors.
6. The benchmark fell more than the median security
Although the Nasdaq 100 index lost 4.91%, the median stock declined just 1.75%. Moreover, 66 of 101 companies (65.35%) outperformed the benchmark over the week.
That relative outperformance should not be confused with healthy breadth: 59 securities still finished lower. It highlights the distinction between the performance of a capitalization-weighted benchmark and the cross-sectional experience of its components. Quantifying the exact contribution of the largest names would require a separate index-weight attribution study.
7. Winners, losers and the technology concentration
The largest weekly advances were AppLovin (+71.21%), IDEXX Laboratories (+22.65%), Airbnb (+15.57%), Moderna (+14.64%) and Take-Two Interactive (+12.99%).
At the other extreme were Lumentum (−35.94%), Seagate Technology (−28.48%), Marvell Technology (−28.11%), Sandisk (−27.44%) and Axon Enterprise (−26.83%).
Pressure was also visible across semiconductor and infrastructure-related names: Nvidia −8.80%, Broadcom −9.93%, AMD −11.05%, Applied Materials −14.71% and Micron −22.01%. The concentration of losses in these groups coexists with substantial positive returns in selected other companies; leadership has become highly uneven rather than disappearing everywhere.
8. Does the evidence establish capitulation?
Not on the information available. The convergence of weakening MA200 breadth, deepening drawdowns, severe weekly losses and unusually active downside trading marks a meaningful episode of market stress. But the long-run breadth record shows that previous bear markets have experienced far deeper deterioration.
This does not imply that another major decline must occur. Corrections can end with very different breadth conditions. Conversely, historically stretched readings can persist without a durable reversal. There is insufficient evidence to classify the current episode as confirmed capitulation or a market bottom.
9. What to monitor next
Stabilization: the proportion of stocks above MA200 stops falling, the distribution of drawdowns levels off, and heavy-volume declines become less prevalent. Broader recovery: more securities reclaim long-term trend references while signed-volume balance and market participation improve. Further deterioration: the current combination of weak breadth, deeper drawdowns and downside volume imbalance persists or intensifies.
None of these scenarios is assigned a probability by this report. A durable improvement in participation would provide stronger evidence than an index rebound supported by only a few large constituents.
10. Conclusion
The Nasdaq 100 is experiencing a rapid deterioration in internal market structure. MA200 breadth has contracted more than 18 percentage points in four weeks, more constituents have entered deep drawdowns, and heavy-volume selling substantially exceeds heavy-volume advancing.
These readings are unusually weak within the recent 155-week sample. Yet the broader historical perspective is essential: 43% of stocks above MA200 is still well above the single-digit participation seen in some major bear markets.
The central question is not whether a historic capitulation has occurred, but whether participation begins to stabilize and recover—or whether selling pressure continues to broaden.
11. Complete weekly ranking · 101 securities
The original, unmodified weekly JSON contains all 101 monitored securities and nine fields: Weekly Rank, Global Rank, Ticker, Company, Last Close, 1W, 4W, 3M and YTD. Missing ranks or returns are displayed as unavailable rather than zero. Search, sorting and copy are provided in both desktop and mobile layouts.
Loading complete ranking…
Methodology and limitations
Data cut-off: November 6, 2026. The monitored NASDAQ100 universe comprises 101 securities and may differ from official index membership or constituent counts at particular dates. Cross-sectional percentages are equal-weight observations, not market-capitalization-weighted index contributions. MA200 breadth and 52-week drawdowns use 99 eligible securities; weekly returns and volume statistics use up to 101, depending on data availability.
The weekly research history spans 155 Fridays from November 24, 2023, through November 6, 2026. A separate long-term daily breadth history starting in 1986 provides historical context only; its changing coverage and composition limit direct comparability. Historical MA200 values are descriptive and are not forecast targets. The price series have been reviewed for corporate-action consistency. The ranking contains no private trading signals or proprietary rule definitions.
Company rankings and market statistics are research observations, not individualized investment recommendations. Read our public methodology and interpretation guide for further explanations and limitations.
Continue exploring
Nasdaq 100 research hub · S&P 500 research · STOXX 600 research · Complete research archive