share_log

Institutional Investors in Dave Inc. (NASDAQ:DAVE) Lost 8.1% Last Week but Have Reaped the Benefits of Longer-term Growth

Institutional Investors in Dave Inc. (NASDAQ:DAVE) Lost 8.1% Last Week but Have Reaped the Benefits of Longer-term Growth

戴夫公司(纳斯达克:DAVE)的机构投资者上周损失了8.1%,但在长期增长中获得了收益。
Simply Wall St ·  01/04 22:17

Key Insights

关键洞察

  • Institutions' substantial holdings in Dave implies that they have significant influence over the company's share price
  • The top 13 shareholders own 50% of the company
  • Insider ownership in Dave is 22%
  • 机构在大卫的重大持股意味着他们对公司股票价格有重要影响
  • 前13大股东拥有公司50%的股份。
  • 大卫的内部持股为22%

If you want to know who really controls Dave Inc. (NASDAQ:DAVE), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are institutions with 48% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.

如果你想知道谁真正控制大卫公司(纳斯达克:DAVE),那么你需要查看其股东名册的构成。而掌握最大份额的群体是持有48%股份的机构。换句话说,这个群体从对公司的投资中最有可能获得最大收益(或损失最大)。

Institutional investors endured the highest losses after the company's market cap fell by US$101m last week. However, the 984% one-year return to shareholders might have softened the blow. They should, however, be mindful of further losses in the future.

在公司市值上周下降了10100万美元后,机构投资者遭受了最高的损失。然而,984%的股东一年回报可能缓解了一些冲击。然而,他们应该对未来进一步的损失保持警惕。

Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Dave.

让我们仔细看看不同类型的股东能够告诉我们关于Dave的信息。

big
NasdaqGM:DAVE Ownership Breakdown January 4th 2025
纳斯达克GM:DAVE 股东结构 2025年1月4日

What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Dave?

机构持股告诉我们关于Dave的信息?

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.

许多机构的表现与近似当地市场的指数进行比较。因此,他们通常更加关注那些被纳入主要指数的公司。

Dave 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 Dave, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.

Dave已经有机构在股东名册上。事实上,他们拥有公司相当可观的股份。这在专业投资者之间表明了一定的信誉。但我们不能仅仅依赖这一事实,因为机构有时也会做出错误的投资,就像所有人一样。如果两个大型机构投资者试图同时出售股票,看到股价大幅下跌并不罕见。因此,查看Dave过去的盈利轨迹是值得的(见下文)。当然,也要记住还有其他因素需要考虑。

big
NasdaqGM:DAVE Earnings and Revenue Growth January 4th 2025
纳斯达克GM:DAVE 盈利和营业收入增长 2025年1月4日

Dave is not owned by hedge funds. With a 12% stake, CEO Jason Wilk is the largest shareholder. With 7.8% and 4.6% of the shares outstanding respectively, Paras Chitrakar and NVP Associates, LLC are the second and third largest shareholders.

Dave并不被对冲基金所拥有。首席执行官Jason Wilk持有12%的股份,是最大的股东。Paras Chitrakar和NVP Associates, LLC分别持有7.8%和4.6%的已发行股份,是第二和第三大股东。

After doing some more digging, we found that the top 13 have the combined ownership of 50% in the company, suggesting that no single shareholder has significant control over the company.

经过进一步调查,我们发现前13名股东合计拥有公司的50%的股份,这表明没有单一股东对公司具有显著控制权。

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. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.

研究机构的所有权是评估和筛选股票预期表现的好方法。分析师情绪的研究也可以达到同样的效果。有很多分析师在覆盖该股票,因此查看他们的预期可能也是值得的。

Insider Ownership Of Dave

Dave的内部持股

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有所不同。我们的数据反映了个人内部人员,至少包括董事会成员。公司管理层负责业务的运行,但CEO需要对董事会负责,即使他或她是董事会成员。

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.

大多数人认为内部持股是积极的,因为这表明董事会与其他股东保持良好的一致性。然而,在某些情况下,权力在这个群体中过于集中。

Our most recent data indicates that insiders own a reasonable proportion of Dave Inc.. It has a market capitalization of just US$1.1b, and insiders have US$243m worth of shares in their own names. That's quite significant. It is good to see this level of investment. You can check here to see if those insiders have been buying recently.

我们最近的数据表明,内部人士持有Dave Inc.一个合理的比例。它的市值仅为11亿美金,内部人士名下的股票价值达24300万美金。这是相当显著的。看到这个投资水平是很好的。您可以在这里查看这些内部人士最近是否有买入。

General Public Ownership

公众持股

With a 30% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over Dave. This size of ownership, while considerable, may not be enough to change company policy if the decision is not in sync with other large shareholders.

一般公众拥有30%的股份,主要由个人投资者组成,对Dave有一定的影响力。虽然这个持股比例相当可观,但如果决策与其他大股东不一致,可能不足以改变公司政策。

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 - Dave has 3 warning signs (and 1 which is significant) we think you should know about.

虽然考虑拥有公司的不同群体非常重要,但还有其他因素更加关键。以风险为例——我们认为戴夫有3个警告信号(其中1个是重要的),你应该知道。

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,你可能想考虑这家公司是会增长还是缩小。幸运的是,你可以查看这份免费的报告,了解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:本文中的数字是根据过去十二个月的数据计算得出的,指的是截至财务报表日期的月份最后一天的12个月期间。这可能与完整年度的年报数字不一致。

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?对内容有疑虑?请直接与我们联系。或者,发送电子邮件至 editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com。
这篇来自Simply Wall St的文章是一般性的。我们根据历史数据和分析师预测提供评论,采用无偏见的方法,我们的文章并不旨在提供财务建议。它不构成对任何股票的买入或卖出建议,也未考虑到您的目标或财务状况。我们旨在为您提供以基本数据驱动的长期分析。请注意,我们的分析可能未考虑最新的价格敏感公司公告或定性材料。Simply Wall St在提到的任何股票中均没有持仓。

声明:本内容仅用作提供资讯及教育之目的,不构成对任何特定投资或投资策略的推荐或认可。 更多信息
    抢沙发