Cricut, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:CRCT) Recent 4.7% Pullback Adds to One-year Year Losses, Institutional Owners May Take Drastic Measures
Cricut, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:CRCT) Recent 4.7% Pullback Adds to One-year Year Losses, Institutional Owners May Take Drastic Measures
Key Insights
主要见解
- Significantly high institutional ownership implies Cricut's stock price is sensitive to their trading actions
- 58% of the company is held by a single shareholder (Petrus Trust Company, LTA)
- Insiders have been selling lately
- 机构股东的占比显著高,这意味着Cricut的股价对他们的交易行为非常敏感。
- 58%的公司股份由单一股东(Petrus Trust Company,LTA)持有。
- 内部人员最近一直在卖出。
A look at the shareholders of Cricut, Inc. (NASDAQ:CRCT) can tell us which group is most powerful. The group holding the most number of shares in the company, around 68% to be precise, is institutions. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
看一下Cricut, Inc.(NASDAQ:CRCT)的股东,可以知道哪个群体最有权力。持有最多股份的群体,准确地说是约68%的机构。换句话说,该群体面临最大的上涨潜力(或下跌风险)。
As a result, institutional investors endured the highest losses last week after market cap fell by US$65m. Needless to say, the recent loss which further adds to the one-year loss to shareholders of 30% might not go down well especially with this category of shareholders. Often called "market movers", institutions wield significant power in influencing the price dynamics of any stock. As a result, if the decline continues, institutional investors may be pressured to sell Cricut which might hurt individual investors.
因此,当市值下降6500万美元时,机构投资者遭受了最大的损失。不用说,最近的损失进一步使股东的一年内损失达到了30%,这可能会令这类股东不满。机构通常被称为“市场推动者”,他们在影响任何股票的价格动态方面拥有重要的权力。因此,如果下降持续下去,机构投资者可能会被迫出售Cricut,这可能会伤害个人投资者。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Cricut.
下面的图表将关注Cricut的不同所有权群体。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Cricut?
机构所有权对Cricut有何启示?
Institutional investors commonly compare their own returns to the returns of a commonly followed index. So they generally do consider buying larger companies that are included in the relevant benchmark index.
机构投资者通常将自己的回报与常见的指数回报进行比较。因此,他们通常会考虑购买包括在相关基准指数中的较大公司。
We can see that Cricut does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. This suggests some credibility amongst professional investors. But we can't rely on that fact alone since institutions make bad investments sometimes, just like everyone does. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see Cricut's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
我们可以看出Cricut确实有机构投资者,而他们持有公司的很大一部分股份。这表明在专业投资者中存在一定的信誉。但是,我们不能单单依靠这个事实,因为机构有时候会做出糟糕的投资,就像所有人一样。当多个机构拥有一种股票时,存在他们进行“集体交易”的风险。当这样的交易失败时,多个投资方可能会争相快速出售股票。这种风险在没有增长历史的公司中更高。您可以在下面看到Cricut的历史收益和营业收入,但请记住,故事还有更多的情节。
Investors should note that institutions actually own more than half the company, so they can collectively wield significant power. Cricut is not owned by hedge funds. Our data shows that Petrus Trust Company, LTA is the largest shareholder with 58% of shares outstanding. With such a huge stake in the ownership, we infer that they have significant control of the future of the company. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 13% and 1.7%, of the shares outstanding, respectively. Ashish Arora, who is the second-largest shareholder, also happens to hold the title of Chief Executive Officer.
投资者应该注意,机构实际占有超过一半的公司股份,因此他们可以集体行使重大的影响力。Cricut不是由对冲基金拥有的。我们的数据显示,Petrus Trust Company,LTA是持有58%流通股的最大股东。由于拥有如此巨大的所有权份额,我们推断他们对公司的未来具有重要的控制权。同时,第二和第三大股东分别持有公司流通股13%和1.7%。第二大股东Ashish Arora还兼任首席执行官。
Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. Quite a few analysts cover the stock, so you could look into forecast growth quite easily.
研究机构持股情况是衡量和筛选股票预期表现的好方法。通过研究分析师的情绪也可以取得相同的结果。相当多的分析师涵盖了这笔股票,所以你可以很容易地调查预测增长。
Insider Ownership Of Cricut
Cricut的内部所有权
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO.
虽然内部人士的精确定义可能是主观的,几乎每个人都认为董事会成员是内部人士。管理层最终向董事会负责。但是,如果他们是创始人或CEO,经理成为执行董事会成员并不罕见。
I generally consider insider ownership to be a good thing. However, on some occasions it makes it more difficult for other shareholders to hold the board accountable for decisions.
我通常认为内部人士持股是一件好事。但是,在某些情况下,它会使其他股东更难以对董事会的决定进行问责。
Our information suggests that insiders maintain a significant holding in Cricut, Inc.. It has a market capitalization of just US$1.4b, and insiders have US$230m worth of shares in their own names. That's quite significant. Most would say this shows a good degree of alignment with shareholders, especially in a company of this size. You can click here to see if those insiders have been buying or selling.
我们的信息表明,内部人士在Cricut, Inc.中拥有大量股份。它的市值仅为14亿美元,而内部人员拥有自己名下的2.3亿美元的股份。这相当重要。大多数人都会说,这显示了在这个规模的公司中与股东的良好一致性。您可以单击此处查看内部人员是否一直在买卖。
General Public Ownership
一般大众所有权
With a 15% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over Cricut. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
总体持股的15%由普通公众,这主要由个人投资者构成。虽然该集团不能完全主导,但它肯定能够对公司的运营产生实际影响。
Next Steps:
下一步:
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. For example, we've discovered 4 warning signs for Cricut (1 is a bit concerning!) that you should be aware of before investing here.
虽然考虑拥有公司的不同群体是非常值得的,但有其他更重要的因素。例如,我们发现Cricut有4个警示信号(其中1个有点令人担忧!),在投资此处之前,您应该了解这些信号。
If you are like me, you may want to think about whether this company will grow or shrink. Luckily, you can check this free report showing analyst forecasts for its future.
如果您像我一样,可能希望考虑这家公司是否会增长或缩小。幸运的是,您可以查看此免费报告,显示分析师对其未来的预测。
NB: Figures in this article are calculated using data from the last twelve months, which refer to the 12-month period ending on the last date of the month the financial statement is dated. This may not be consistent with full year annual report figures.
注:本文中的数据是使用最后一个财务报表日期结束的为期12个月的数据计算的。这可能与全年年度报告数据不一致。
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com.
This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned.
对本文有反馈?关于内容有所顾虑?直接和我们联系。或者,发送电子邮件至editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com。
这篇文章是Simply Wall St的一般性文章。我们根据历史数据和分析师预测提供评论,只使用公正的方法论,我们的文章并不意味着提供任何金融建议。文章不构成买卖任何股票的建议,也不考虑您的目标或您的财务状况。我们的目标是带给您基本数据驱动的长期关注分析。请注意,我们的分析可能不考虑最新的价格敏感公司公告或定性材料。Simply Wall St没有任何股票头寸。