With 85% Institutional Ownership, Cadence Bank (NYSE:CADE) Is a Favorite Amongst the Big Guns
With 85% Institutional Ownership, Cadence Bank (NYSE:CADE) Is a Favorite Amongst the Big Guns
Key Insights
主要见解
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, Cadence Bank's stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- 53% of the business is held by the top 8 shareholders
- Insiders have sold recently
- 由于机构在股票中持有大量股份,Cadence银行的股价可能容易受到他们交易决策的影响。
- 前8大股东持有该公司53%的股份。
- 近期内有内部人士出售股票
To get a sense of who is truly in control of Cadence Bank (NYSE:CADE), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. We can see that institutions own the lion's share in the company with 85% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
要真正了解Cadence Bank(纽交所:CADE)的实际控制人,了解企业的所有权结构是很重要的。我们可以看到,机构拥有公司85%的所有权。换句话说,该集团面临着最大的上行潜力(或下行风险)。
Because institutional owners have a huge pool of resources and liquidity, their investing decisions tend to carry a great deal of weight, especially with individual investors. As a result, a sizeable amount of institutional money invested in a firm is generally viewed as a positive attribute.
因为机构所有者拥有庞大的资源和流动性,他们的投资决策往往带有很大的分量,尤其是对于个人投资者来说。因此,机构投资在一家公司中的大量资金通常被视为一个积极因素。
Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Cadence Bank, beginning with the chart below.
让我们深入了解Cadence银行每种所有者类型,从下面的图表开始。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Cadence Bank?
机构所有权对Cadence银行意味着什么?
Institutions typically measure themselves against a benchmark when reporting to their own investors, so they often become more enthusiastic about a stock once it's included in a major index. We would expect most companies to have some institutions on the register, especially if they are growing.
机构通常在向自己的投资者报告时会针对一个基准进行衡量,因此一旦某只股票被纳入主要指数,他们通常会更加热衷于该股票。我们预计大多数公司都会有一些机构在登记簿上,尤其是那些正在增长的公司。
Cadence Bank already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. This implies the analysts working for those institutions have looked at the stock and they like it. But just like anyone else, they could be wrong. It is not uncommon to see a big share price drop if two large institutional investors try to sell out of a stock at the same time. So it is worth checking the past earnings trajectory of Cadence Bank, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
Cadence银行已经有机构持股。确实,它们在公司中拥有可观的股份。这意味着为这些机构工作的分析师已经研究了这支股票,而且他们喜欢。但就像其他人一样,他们可能也会出错。如果两大机构投资者同时试图抛售某只股票,股价大幅下跌并不罕见。因此,值得查看Cadence银行以往的收益轨迹(下图)。当然,也要记住还有其他因素需要考虑。
Since institutional investors own more than half the issued stock, the board will likely have to pay attention to their preferences. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Cadence Bank. The company's largest shareholder is The Vanguard Group, Inc., with ownership of 11%. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 9.7% and 8.9% of the stock.
由于机构投资者拥有超过半数已发行股份,董事会可能需要关注他们的偏好。我们注意到对于凯登斯银行,对冲基金并没有具有重大的投资。公司最大的股东是先锋集团,拥有11%的股权。相比之下,第二和第三大股东各持有大约9.7%和8.9%的股票。
On further inspection, we found that more than half the company's shares are owned by the top 8 shareholders, suggesting that the interests of the larger shareholders are balanced out to an extent by the smaller ones.
进一步调查发现,超过一半的Bentley Systems股份归前8位股东所有,这表明大股东和小股东的利益在一定程度上得到平衡。
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.
研究机构持股比例是衡量和筛选股票预期表现的好方法。同样可以通过研究分析师情绪来实现。由于相当多的分析师都关注着该股票,因此你可以很容易地研究预测的增长。
Insider Ownership Of Cadence Bank
我们可以看到内部股东持有Cadence银行的股票。内部股东持有价值为6700万美元的股份。大多数人会将此视为真正的正面因素。大多数人会说这表明股东和董事会彼此利益一致。不过,也许值得检查的是这些内部人员是否一直在抛售股票。
The definition of company insiders can be subjective and does vary between jurisdictions. Our data reflects individual insiders, capturing board members at the very least. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.
公司内部人员的定义可能是主观的,并且在不同的司法管辖区之间是不同的。我们的数据反映了个别内部人员,至少捕捉到了董事会成员。公司管理业务,但首席执行官即使是董事会成员也必须向董事会负责。
Most consider insider ownership a positive because it can indicate the board is well aligned with other shareholders. However, on some occasions too much power is concentrated within this group.
大多数人认为内部所有权是积极的,因为它可以表示董事会与其他股东的利益相一致。但是,在某些场合下,这个团体的权力过于集中。
We can see that insiders own shares in Cadence Bank. It is a pretty big company, so it is generally a positive to see some potentially meaningful alignment. In this case, they own around US$77m worth of shares (at current prices). Most would say this shows alignment of interests between shareholders and the board. Still, it might be worth checking if those insiders have been selling.
我们可以看到,内部持有Cadence Bank的股份。这是一家相当大的企业,因此看到一些可能有意义的一致性通常是积极的。在这种情况下,他们拥有价值约7700万美元的股份(按现价计算)。大多数人会说,这表明股东和董事会之间存在利益一致。不过,还是值得检查一下这些内部人员是否一直在抛售。
General Public Ownership
一般大众所有权
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 14% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. While this size of ownership may not be enough to sway a policy decision in their favour, they can still make a collective impact on company policies.
一般公众,包括散户投资者,拥有该公司14%的股份,因此不能轻易忽视。尽管这种所有权的规模可能不足以在他们的利益方面影响政策决策,但他们仍然可以对公司政策产生集体影响。
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. Take risks for example - Cadence Bank has 3 warning signs we think you should be aware of.
尽管考虑拥有公司的不同群体是值得的,但有其他更重要的因素。例如,风险 - 我们认为凯登斯银行有3个警示信号,我们认为您应该意识到。
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.
对本文有任何反馈?对内容有任何疑虑?请直接与我们联系。或者,发送电子邮件至editorial-team@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。