Glossary
A share market index is a basket of stocks that measures a market's performance - the ASX 200 covering the 200 largest, the All Ordinaries most of the rest. Index funds hold the basket; the news quotes the number.
A share market index is a basket of stocks, weighted and totalled, that measures how a market is performing. The ASX 200 holds the 200 largest companies by market capitalisation; the All Ordinaries holds the 500 largest and is the older, broader measure. The index is weighted by size, which means the biggest companies move it the most - the four major banks together are roughly a fifth of the ASX 200, and one of them alone is close to a tenth. The index is a sample, not the population: 200 names out of more than 2,000 listed.
The Australian detail worth knowing is the two versions of the number. The price index - the one the news quotes - excludes dividends; the accumulation index includes them, and the gap is roughly 4 percent a year. An index fund buys the constituents at their weights and tracks the basket, and the index fund entry covers the wrapper. Every managed fund and ETF quotes its performance against an index benchmark, which makes the index the scoreboard the industry is judged on.
The basket is the mechanism. The index provider sizes each stock's weight by market capitalisation - price multiplied by shares on issue - and rebalances the weights as the sizes change. A company worth a tenth of the index moves the index a tenth of its own move; a stock at half a percent barely registers. The concentration is arithmetic, not opinion: the four major banks together are roughly a fifth of the ASX 200, and the miners add another block.
The two versions of the number are the second mechanism. The price index adds up the prices and ignores the dividends; the accumulation index reinvests them, and the difference compounds at roughly 4 percent a year. Over twenty years, the accumulation version nearly doubles the price version's outcome - the news quotes the smaller number, and the portfolio earns the larger one. The investment calculator prices the gap at any rate and term.
The tracking is the third mechanism. An index fund buys the constituents at their weights, holds them as the weights drift, and delivers the index's return minus a small fee. The All Ordinaries adds the next tier of small caps below the 200, which historically underperformed the large caps - the two indices told different stories over the last decade. The benchmark names which basket applies, and the portfolio diversification calculator measures the concentration in any holding that tracks it.
For an Australian reader, the index is the scoreboard behind every fund comparison and the number the news quotes twice a day. The confusion that costs money is the price index. Comparing a total-return fund against the news number makes the fund look 4 percent a year underperforming when it is tracking perfectly. MoneySmart's guidance on investing treats the index as the benchmark, and the concentration - banks and miners at half the index - is the bet the index name never declares. The blue chip entry covers the same concentration from the company side.
A colleague named Brent (yes, that Brent) spent a year convinced his index fund was underperforming, because the news quoted the ASX 200 price index and his statements showed the accumulation version. The gap was the dividends; the fund was tracking the basket perfectly. The year of doubt cost him a switch he spent months undoing. The highest-leverage thing most Australians can do is compare like with like - total return against accumulation index - and run the investment calculator on the gap the dividends make over twenty years.
The ASX 200 price index has returned roughly 5 percent a year over the long run; the accumulation index with dividends reinvested is roughly 8.5 percent. On $100,000 over twenty years, the price version compounds to roughly $265,000 and the accumulation version to roughly $510,000 - the dividends are the difference, and the news quotes the smaller number. Comparing a fund's total return against the price index makes it look 3 to 4 percent a year worse than it is.
The four major banks alone are roughly a fifth of the ASX 200 by weight, and the miners add another concentrated block. When the banks fall 10 percent, the index loses roughly 2 percent from them alone - before the miners move. A fifth of the index is a portfolio bet the label never declares, and the portfolio diversification calculator measures the same concentration in any holding that tracks the basket.
The All Ordinaries holds the 500 largest companies and adds the small-cap tier the 200 excludes. Over the last decade the small caps underperformed the large caps, which means the two indices told different stories from the same market. A fund benchmarked to the All Ords and compared against the ASX 200 - or the reverse - inherits a comparison that was never apples to apples. The benchmark names the basket; the comparison starts there.
Mistake: Comparing a total-return fund against the news price index.
Why it bites you: The price index excludes roughly 4 percent a year of dividends, and the fund looks underperforming while it tracks perfectly. Brent's year of doubt came from exactly this.
Mistake: Treating the ASX 200 and All Ordinaries as interchangeable.
Why it bites you: Different constituents, different returns - the small-cap tier diverged for a decade. The benchmark decides which basket applies to the comparison.
Mistake: Forgetting the index is cap-weighted.
Why it bites you: The biggest companies move it the most, and the banks-plus-miners concentration is half the index. Holding the index is a sector bet the name never declares.
Mistake: Assuming the index is the whole market.
Why it bites you: 200 names out of more than 2,000 listed - the index is a sample. The thousands of smaller companies are the part the basket does not hold.
I spent an afternoon with the ASX's index pages and the investment calculator running the price-versus-accumulation gap at three terms so you don't have to. The gap is the dividends, the gap compounds, and the news will keep quoting the smaller number because the smaller number moves more and reads better. The index is the scoreboard; knowing which scoreboard is the part that took me an afternoon.
Brent doubted a perfectly tracking fund for a year because the two versions of the number looked 4 percent apart. The dividends were the gap; the switch he nearly made was the cost of not knowing. Compare like with like, check the concentration the weights hide, and let the accumulation index be the benchmark. The price index is the headline; the total return is the portfolio.
The ASX 200 holds the 200 largest companies; the All Ordinaries holds the 500 largest and adds the small-cap tier. The two have diverged for years at a time, so the benchmark decides which comparison applies.
The price index - the number the news quotes - does not. The accumulation index includes dividends and runs roughly 4 percent a year above the price version.
By market capitalisation - price multiplied by shares on issue - so the biggest companies carry the largest weights. The four major banks together are roughly a fifth of the index.
The largest weights: the banks and the miners. A 10 percent move in a company worth a tenth of the index moves the index roughly 1 percent.
Not directly - the index is a calculation, not a product. Index funds and ETFs hold the constituents at their weights and deliver the index return minus a small fee.
Disclaimer: This information is general in nature and does not constitute financial or legal advice. Always consult a qualified professional for your specific situation.

Financial Chaos Analyst
Ivy Sinclair-Wren is a Financial Chaos Analyst covering investing, AI, wealth psychology, and the emotional consequences of opening finance apps during market crashes. Based in Melbourne, she specializes in demystifying the Australian tax code and helping users navigate the intersection of spreadsheet logic and human irrationality.