Insiders of Levi Strauss & Co. (NYSE:LEVI) Were Rewarded After Last Week's 5.5% Gain
Insiders of Levi Strauss & Co. (NYSE:LEVI) Were Rewarded After Last Week's 5.5% Gain
Key Insights
主要見解
- Insiders appear to have a vested interest in Levi Strauss' growth, as seen by their sizeable ownership
- The top 7 shareholders own 51% of the company
- Recent purchases by insiders
- 內部人士似乎對李維斯的增長有着既得利益,這可以從他們擁有的大量股權中看出。
- 前7大股東擁有該公司的51%。
- 最近有內部人員購買。
A look at the shareholders of Levi Strauss & Co. (NYSE:LEVI) can tell us which group is most powerful. With 56% stake, individual insiders possess the maximum shares in the company. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.
看看李維斯公司(紐交所:LEVI)的股東可以告訴我們哪個群體最強大。個別內部人士持有公司的最大股份,佔56%。換句話說,該群體從他們對公司的投資中最有可能獲得最大的收益(或蒙受最大的損失)。
Our data shows that insiders recently bought shares in the company and they were rewarded after market cap rose US$382m last week.
據我們的數據顯示,內部人士最近購買了該公司的股票,上週市值增加了38200萬美元。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Levi Strauss.
在下面的圖表中,我們放大了李維斯的不同所有權群體。
![big](https://usnewsfile.moomoo.com/public/MM-PersistNewsContentImage/7781/20240802/0-cfa824f76a28a56d8a827415e1d343a2-0-f16386a92edd477046eb951242a2bb28.png/big)
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Levi Strauss?
機構的持股情況告訴我們有哪些機構是李維斯的重要持股者。李維斯已經有機構在股東名冊上了。實際上,他們在公司中擁有相當比例的股份。這意味着爲這些機構工作的分析師已經看過這股票並喜歡。但就像其他人一樣,他們也可能會犯錯。如果多個機構同時改變了他們對一支股票的看法,你可能會看到股價迅速下跌。因此值得看一下李維斯下面的收益歷史。當然,未來才是真正重要的。
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.
許多機構衡量其業績的標準是一個近似於當地市場的指數。因此,他們通常更加關注包括在主要指數中的公司。
Levi Strauss 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. 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 Levi Strauss' earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters.
李維斯已經有機構在股東名冊上了。實際上,他們在公司中擁有相當比例的股份。這意味着爲這些機構工作的分析師已經看過這股票並喜歡。但就像其他人一樣,他們也可能會犯錯。如果多個機構同時改變了他們對一支股票的看法,你可能會看到股價迅速下跌。因此值得看一下李維斯下面的收益歷史。當然,未來才是真正重要的。
![big](https://usnewsfile.moomoo.com/public/MM-PersistNewsContentImage/7781/20240802/0-cfa824f76a28a56d8a827415e1d343a2-1-16d753b3cb08798bb4d5e0513c7409a7.png/big)
Hedge funds don't have many shares in Levi Strauss. Miriam Haas is currently the largest shareholder, with 11% of shares outstanding. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 9.3% and 8.8%, of the shares outstanding, respectively.
對於李維斯來說,對沖基金並不持有太多股票。米里亞姆·哈斯(Miriam Haas)是目前持有公司11%流通股的最大股東。與此同時,第二大和第三大股東分別持有流通股的9.3%和8.8%。
We did some more digging and found that 7 of the top shareholders account for roughly 51% of the register, implying that along with larger shareholders, there are a few smaller shareholders, thereby balancing out each others interests somewhat.
我們進行了更深入的挖掘,發現前7名股東持有大約51%的股份,這意味着除了較大的股東外,還有一些較小的股東,從而在一定程度上平衡了彼此的利益。
While studying institutional ownership for a company can add value to your research, it is also a good practice to research analyst recommendations to get a deeper understand of a stock's expected performance. There are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.
儘管研究公司的機構所有權可以爲您的研究增加價值,但研究分析師的建議也是一個好習慣,以深入了解股票的預期表現。有許多分析師對這支股票進行了覆蓋,因此了解他們的預測可能值得一試。
Insider Ownership Of Levi Strauss
李維斯的內部人士持有超過一半的股份。這使他們有效地控制了公司。內部人士在這家73億美元的公司中持有40億美元的股份。這是非同尋常的!大多數人會高興地看到董事會與他們一起投資。你可能希望了解他們是否一直在購買或出售。
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.
公司內部人員的定義可能是主觀的,並且在不同的司法管轄區之間是不同的。我們的數據反映了個別內部人員,至少捕捉到了董事會成員。公司管理業務,但首席執行官即使是董事會成員也必須向董事會負責。
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.
當內部人持股情況表明領導層思考和公司真正所有者一樣時,內部所有權是積極的。然而,高達內部人士所有權也可能爲公司內的小團體帶來巨大的權力。在某些情況下,這可能是負面的。
Our information suggests that insiders own more than half of Levi Strauss & Co.. This gives them effective control of the company. Insiders own US$4.0b worth of shares in the US$7.3b company. That's extraordinary! Most would be pleased to see the board is investing alongside them. You may wish to discover if they have been buying or selling.
普通公衆,通常是個人投資者,持有李維斯15%的股份。雖然這種所有權規模可能不足以左右政策決策,但他們仍然可以對公司政策產生集體影響。
General Public Ownership
一般大衆所有權
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 15% stake in Levi Strauss. 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.
始終值得考慮不同的持股群體。但要更好地了解李維斯,我們需要考慮許多其他因素。案例的關鍵在於:我們已經發現了三個李維斯的警告信號,你應該知道。
Next Steps:
下一步:
It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand Levi Strauss better, we need to consider many other factors. Case in point: We've spotted 3 warning signs for Levi Strauss you should be aware of.
始終值得考慮不同的持股群體。但要更好地了解李維斯,我們需要考慮許多其他因素。案例的關鍵在於:我們已經發現了三個李維斯的警告信號,你應該知道。
If you would prefer discover what analysts are predicting in terms of future growth, do not miss this free report on analyst forecasts.
如果您希望了解分析師在未來增長方面的預測,請務必不要錯過這份免費報告。
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.
對本文有任何反饋?對內容有任何疑慮?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team@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
對本文有任何反饋?對內容有任何疑慮?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team@simplywallst.com。