Institutional Investors Control 83% of Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (NYSE:VRTS) and Were Rewarded Last Week After Stock Increased 4.3%
Institutional Investors Control 83% of Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (NYSE:VRTS) and Were Rewarded Last Week After Stock Increased 4.3%
Key Insights
主要見解
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, Virtus Investment Partners' stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- A total of 8 investors have a majority stake in the company with 50% ownership
- Recent sales by insiders
- 考慮到機構在該股上持有的大量股份,Virtus Investment Partners的股票價格可能會受到他們交易決策的影響。
- 共有8家投資者擁有該公司的50%所有權。
- 最近由內部人士出售。
Every investor in Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (NYSE:VRTS) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. We can see that institutions own the lion's share in the company with 83% ownership. That is, the group stands to benefit the most if the stock rises (or lose the most if there is a downturn).
紐交所(VRTS)所有投資者都應該了解最重要的股東群體。我們可以看到機構持有該公司的大部分股權,佔83%。也就是說,如果股票上漲,該群體將獲益最大(或在經濟衰退時損失最大)。
Last week's 4.3% gain means that institutional investors were on the positive end of the spectrum even as the company has shown strong longer-term trends. The gains from last week would have further boosted the one-year return to shareholders which currently stand at 16%.
上週的4.3%上漲意味着即使公司表現出強勁的長期趨勢,機構投資者仍處於正面。上週的收益將進一步提高股東的一年回報率,目前爲16%。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Virtus Investment Partners.
在下面的圖表中,我們着重關注Virtus Investment Partners的不同所有權群體。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Virtus Investment Partners?
機構投資者的持股情況能告訴我們什麼?
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.
機構投資者通常將自己的回報與常見的指數回報進行比較。因此,他們通常會考慮購買包括在相關基準指數中的較大公司。
As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in Virtus Investment Partners. 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. If multiple institutions change their view on a stock at the same time, you could see the share price drop fast. It's therefore worth looking at Virtus Investment Partners' earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters.
正如你所看到的,機構投資者在Virtus Investment Partners中擁有相當比例的股份。這意味着一些專業投資者認爲該公司有些可信度。但我們不能僅依賴這一事實,因爲機構有時會像其他人一樣犯糊塗的投資。如果多個機構同時改變他們的股票看法,你可能會看到股票價格快速下跌。所以,值得看一下下面的Virtus Investment Partners的盈利歷史。當然,未來才是真正重要的。
Investors should note that institutions actually own more than half the company, so they can collectively wield significant power. Virtus Investment Partners is not owned by hedge funds. Our data shows that BlackRock, Inc. is the largest shareholder with 15% of shares outstanding. For context, the second largest shareholder holds about 13% of the shares outstanding, followed by an ownership of 4.5% by the third-largest shareholder. Additionally, the company's CEO George Aylward directly holds 3.7% of the total shares outstanding.
投資者應該注意到機構實際上擁有公司的一半以上,因此他們可以集體行使重要的權利。Virtus Investment Partners不歸對沖基金所有。我們的數據顯示,BlackRock, Inc.是最大的股東,持有15%的流通股。爲了更好理解,第二大股東持有約13%的流通股,第三大股東擁有4.5%的所有權。此外,該公司的首席執行官George Aylward直接持有總流通股的3.7%。
We did some more digging and found that 8 of the top shareholders account for roughly 50% of the register, implying that along with larger shareholders, there are a few smaller shareholders, thereby balancing out each others interests somewhat.
我們對Brookfield Infrastructure有了更深入的了解,發現前8位股東佔持股比例的約50%,這意味着除了大股東外還有少數小股東,從而在一定程度上平衡了彼此的利益。
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 is some analyst coverage of the stock, but it could still become more well known, with time.
雖然研究一家公司的機構所有權數據是有意義的,但研究分析師的情緒也是有意義的,以了解風向正在往哪裏吹。雖然有一些分析師對該股票進行了覆蓋,但隨着時間的推移,它可能仍然會變得更加知名。
Insider Ownership Of Virtus Investment Partners
Virtus Investment Partners的內部所有權
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.
雖然“內部人士”的明確定義具有主觀性,但幾乎所有人都認爲董事會成員是內部人士。公司管理業務,但首席執行官即使是董事會成員,也要向董事會負責。
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.
我通常認爲內部人士持股是一件好事。但是,在某些情況下,它會使其他股東更難以對董事會的決定進行問責。
We can report that insiders do own shares in Virtus Investment Partners, Inc.. This is a big company, so it is good to see this level of alignment. Insiders own US$99m worth of shares (at current prices). It is good to see this level of investment by insiders. You can check here to see if those insiders have been buying recently.
我們可以報告,內部人確實擁有Virtus Investment Partners,Inc的股份。這是一家大公司,所以看到這種程度的一致性是好的。內部人擁有價值9900萬美元的股份(按當前價格計算)。看到內部人這種程度的投資是好的。您可以在此處檢查內幕人員最近是否在購買。
General Public Ownership
一般大衆所有權
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 11% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. 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.
一般公衆——包括零售投資者——在公司中擁有11%的股份,因此不容易被忽略。雖然持股規模相當大,但如果決策與其他大股東不同步,這可能不足以改變公司政策。
Next Steps:
下一步:
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. Be aware that Virtus Investment Partners is showing 1 warning sign in our investment analysis , you should know about...
我發現查看公司的所有權非常有趣。但要真正獲得洞察力,我們還需要考慮其他信息。請注意,Virtus Investment Partners在我們的投資分析中顯示出了1個警告信號,你應該知道...
But ultimately it is the future, not the past, that will determine how well the owners of this business will do. Therefore we think it advisable to take a look at this free report showing whether analysts are predicting a brighter future.
但最終,決定該業務所有者將獲得多大利益的是未來而非過去。因此,我們認爲最好查看此免費報告,以了解分析師是否預測更光明的未來。
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:本文中的數據是使用最後一個財務報表日期結束的爲期12個月的數據計算的。這可能與全年年度報告數據不一致。
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.
對本文有反饋?對內容感到擔憂?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com。
這篇文章是Simply Wall St的一般性文章。我們根據歷史數據和分析師預測提供評論,只使用公正的方法論,我們的文章並不意味着提供任何金融建議。文章不構成買賣任何股票的建議,也不考慮您的目標或您的財務狀況。我們的目標是帶給您基本數據驅動的長期關注分析。請注意,我們的分析可能不考慮最新的價格敏感公司公告或定性材料。Simply Wall St沒有任何股票頭寸。
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com
對本文有反饋?對內容感到擔憂?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team@simplywallst.com。