All selected sub[haloes]{} form prior to redshift 8. Solid colored lines represent different sub[haloes]{}. The black dashed line shows the spin of a halo changing with time as a reference.[]{data-label="pic3"}](LZ_Subfind_Bullock "fig:"){width="\linewidth"}

  -- ---------- --------- ------- ------- -------
                                          
                $a$       $b$     $a$     $b$
     $z=0$      0.013     -1.41   0.039   -1.53
     $z=0.84$   0.0015    -1.42   0.037   -1.49
     $z=2.38$   -0.010    -1.43   0.018   -1.44
     $z=5.21$   -0.017    -1.46   0.018   -1.41
                                          
                                          
                $a$       $b$     $a$     $b$
     $z=0$      0.028     -1.47   0.069   -1.68
     $z=0.84$   0.021     -1.46   0.066   -1.61
     $z=2.38$   0.0073    -1.42   0.047   -1.47
     $z=5.21$   -0.0068   -1.39   0.037   -1.37
  -- ---------- --------- ------- ------- -------

  : Parameters for fitted lines for spin against (sub-)halo mass[]{data-label="tab:ab"}

Discussion & Conclusions {#sec:discussion}
========================

In this work we compared the spin distribution function of [haloes]{} and sub[haloes]{} in sets of cosmological box simulations. We found that the *halo* spin distribution function is well fitted by the parametrisations given by @bullock_2001 and @bett_2007 for the Bullock and Peebles [@peebles_1969] spin parameter, respectively. For the *subhalo* spin distribution function, however, the typical spin of a small subhalo is significantly lower. This was previously suggested by @onions_2013 for the sub[haloes]{} within Milky Way-like [haloes]{}, but is confirmed here for a full cosmological volume.

We investigated the origin of the difference between 