Root, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:ROOT) Institutional Investors Lost 4.8% Over the Past Week but Have Profited From Longer-term Gains
Root, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:ROOT) Institutional Investors Lost 4.8% Over the Past Week but Have Profited From Longer-term Gains
Key Insights
关键见解
- Significantly high institutional ownership implies Root's stock price is sensitive to their trading actions
- A total of 11 investors have a majority stake in the company with 52% ownership
- Recent sales by insiders
- 高机构所有权意味着 Root 的股价对其交易行为很敏感
- 共有11名投资者持有该公司的多数股权,所有权为52%
- 内部人士最近的销售额
To get a sense of who is truly in control of Root, Inc. (NASDAQ:ROOT), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. The group holding the most number of shares in the company, around 39% to be precise, is institutions. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
要了解谁真正控制了Root, Inc.(纳斯达克股票代码:ROOT),了解业务的所有权结构非常重要。持有该公司股份最多的集团是机构,准确地说约为39%。换句话说,该集团面临最大的上行潜力(或下行风险)。
Institutional investors was the group most impacted after the company's market cap fell to US$1.1b last week. However, the 570% one-year return to shareholders may have helped lessen their pain. They should, however, be mindful of further losses in the future.
上周该公司的市值跌至11亿美元后,机构投资者是受影响最大的群体。但是,570%的股东一年回报率可能有助于减轻他们的痛苦。但是,他们应该注意未来的进一步损失。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Root.
让我们仔细看看不同类型的股东能告诉我们关于Root的什么。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Root?
关于Root,机构所有权告诉我们什么?
Many institutions measure their performance against an index that approximates the local market. So they usually pay more attention to companies that are included in major indices.
许多机构根据接近当地市场的指数来衡量其表现。因此,他们通常会更多地关注主要指数中包含的公司。
Root already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. 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. 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 Root, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
Root 已经在股份登记处设立了机构。事实上,他们拥有该公司可观的股份。这表明专业投资者有一定的信誉。但是我们不能仅仅依靠这个事实,因为机构有时会像所有人一样进行不良投资。如果两个大型机构投资者试图同时抛售股票,股价大幅下跌的情况并不少见。因此,值得检查一下Root过去的收益轨迹(见下文)。当然,请记住,还有其他因素需要考虑。
Hedge funds don't have many shares in Root. Ribbit Management Company, LLC is currently the company's largest shareholder with 9.7% of shares outstanding. With 9.6% and 7.4% of the shares outstanding respectively, Christopher Olsen and Alexander Timm are the second and third largest shareholders. Alexander Timm, who is the third-largest shareholder, also happens to hold the title of Chairman of the Board.
对冲基金在Root中的股票不多。Ribbit Management Company, LLC目前是该公司的最大股东,已发行股份为9.7%。克里斯托弗·奥尔森和亚历山大·蒂姆分别拥有9.6%和7.4%的已发行股份,是第二和第三大股东。第三大股东亚历山大·蒂姆也恰好拥有董事会主席的头衔。
A closer look at our ownership figures suggests that the top 11 shareholders have a combined ownership of 52% implying that no single shareholder has a majority.
仔细观察我们的所有权数据后发现,前11名股东的总所有权为52%,这意味着没有一个股东占多数。
While it makes sense to study institutional ownership data for a company, it also makes sense to study analyst sentiments to know which way the wind is blowing. There are a reasonable number of analysts covering the stock, so it might be useful to find out their aggregate view on the future.
尽管研究公司的机构所有权数据是有意义的,但研究分析师的情绪以了解公众舆论也是有意义的。有合理数量的分析师报道该股,因此了解他们对未来的总体看法可能会很有用。
Insider Ownership Of Root
Root 的内部所有权
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.
尽管内部人员的确切定义可能是主观的,但几乎所有人都认为董事会成员是内部人士。公司管理层经营业务,但首席执行官将对董事会负责,即使他或她是董事会成员。
Insider ownership is positive when it signals leadership are thinking like the true owners of the company. However, high insider ownership can also give immense power to a small group within the company. This can be negative in some circumstances.
当内部所有权表明领导层像公司的真正所有者一样思考时,内部所有权是积极的。但是,高内部所有权也可以赋予公司内部一小部分人巨大的权力。在某些情况下,这可能是负面的。
Our most recent data indicates that insiders own a reasonable proportion of Root, Inc.. It is very interesting to see that insiders have a meaningful US$228m stake in this US$1.1b business. Most would be pleased to see the board is investing alongside them. You may wish to access this free chart showing recent trading by insiders.
我们最新的数据表明,内部人士拥有Root, Inc.合理比例的股份。有趣的是,内部人士在这项11亿美元的业务中拥有2.28亿美元的大量股份。大多数人会很高兴看到董事会与他们一起投资。您不妨访问这张显示内部人士近期交易的免费图表。
General Public Ownership
普通公有制
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 25% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
包括散户投资者在内的公众拥有该公司25%的股份,因此不容忽视。尽管这个群体不一定能做主,但它肯定会对公司的运作方式产生真正的影响。
Private Equity Ownership
私募股权所有权
With an ownership of 15%, private equity firms are in a position to play a role in shaping corporate strategy with a focus on value creation. Some might like this, because private equity are sometimes activists who hold management accountable. But other times, private equity is selling out, having taking the company public.
私募股权公司拥有15%的所有权,可以在制定以价值创造为重点的公司战略方面发挥作用。有些人可能会喜欢这样,因为私募股权有时是追究管理层责任的激进分子。但是其他时候,私募股权在公司上市后正在售罄。
Next Steps:
后续步骤:
I find it very interesting to look at who exactly owns a company. But to truly gain insight, we need to consider other information, too. For example, we've discovered 3 warning signs for Root (1 makes us a bit uncomfortable!) that you should be aware of before investing here.
我觉得看看究竟谁拥有一家公司非常有趣。但是,要真正获得见解,我们还需要考虑其他信息。例如,我们发现了 Root 的 3 个警告标志(1 个让我们有点不舒服!)在这里投资之前,您应该注意这一点。
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.
如果你像我一样,你可能需要考虑这家公司是增长还是萎缩。幸运的是,您可以查看这份免费报告,该报告显示了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.
注意:本文中的数字是使用过去十二个月的数据计算得出的,这些数据是指截至财务报表日期当月最后日期的12个月期间。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.
对这篇文章有反馈吗?担心内容吗?直接联系我们。或者,发送电子邮件给编辑组(网址为)simplywallst.com。
Simply Wall St 的这篇文章本质上是笼统的。我们仅使用公正的方法提供基于历史数据和分析师预测的评论,我们的文章并非旨在提供财务建议。它不构成买入或卖出任何股票的建议,也没有考虑到您的目标或财务状况。我们的目标是为您提供由基本数据驱动的长期重点分析。请注意,我们的分析可能不会考虑最新的价格敏感型公司公告或定性材料。华尔街只是没有持有上述任何股票的头寸。