Insiders of Pulse Biosciences, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLSE) Must Be Frustrated After Market Cap Dropped US$69m Since Recent Purchases
Insiders of Pulse Biosciences, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLSE) Must Be Frustrated After Market Cap Dropped US$69m Since Recent Purchases
Key Insights
關鍵見解
- Insiders appear to have a vested interest in Pulse Biosciences' growth, as seen by their sizeable ownership
- Robert Duggan owns 70% of the company
- Insiders have bought recently
- 內部人士似乎對Pulse Biosciences的增長有既得利益,從他們龐大的所有權可以看出
- 羅伯特·杜根擁有該公司70%的股份
- 內部人士最近買了
To get a sense of who is truly in control of Pulse Biosciences, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLSE), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are individual insiders with 71% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
要了解誰真正控制了Pulse Biosciences, Inc.(納斯達克股票代碼:PLSE),了解業務的所有權結構非常重要。而持有最大份額的集團是擁有71%所有權的個人內部人士。換句話說,該集團面臨最大的上行潛力(或下行風險)。
Notably, insiders have bought shares recently. However, with shares price down 7.5% last week, they must be disappointed.
值得注意的是,內部人士最近購買了股票。但是,由於上週股價下跌了7.5%,他們一定感到失望。
Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Pulse Biosciences, beginning with the chart below.
讓我們從下圖開始,深入研究Pulse Biosciences的每種所有者。
![big](https://usnewsfile.moomoo.com/public/MM-PersistNewsContentImage/7781/20240806/0-275af4fe0f26b9e87f960222c3617b31-0-9cc6096eefbb5501ae58f0883676442b.png/big)
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Pulse Biosciences?
關於Pulse Biosciences,機構所有權告訴我們什麼?
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.
機構在向自己的投資者報告時通常會根據基準來衡量自己,因此,一旦股票被納入主要指數,他們通常會對股票更加熱情。我們預計大多數公司都會有一些機構在冊,尤其是在它們正在成長的情況下。
As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in Pulse Biosciences. This can indicate that the company has a certain degree of credibility in the investment community. However, it is best to be wary of relying on the supposed validation that comes with institutional investors. They too, get it wrong sometimes. 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 Pulse Biosciences, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
如你所見,機構投資者在Pulse Biosciences中擁有相當數量的股份。這可能表明該公司在投資界具有一定程度的信譽。但是,最好謹慎行事,不要依賴機構投資者所謂的驗證。他們也是,有時候會弄錯。如果兩個大型機構投資者試圖同時拋售股票,股價大幅下跌的情況並不少見。因此,值得檢查一下Pulse Biosciences過去的收益軌跡(見下文)。當然,請記住,還有其他因素需要考慮。
![big](https://usnewsfile.moomoo.com/public/MM-PersistNewsContentImage/7781/20240806/0-275af4fe0f26b9e87f960222c3617b31-1-4d8a9fd52095d297c5bce9a488b7bc71.png/big)
We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Pulse Biosciences. From our data, we infer that the largest shareholder is Robert Duggan (who also holds the title of Top Key Executive) with 70% of shares outstanding. Its usually considered a good sign when insiders own a significant number of shares in the company, and in this case, we're glad to see a company insider play the role of a key stakeholder. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 1.7% and 1.4% of the stock.
我們注意到,對沖基金沒有對Pulse Biosciences進行有意義的投資。根據我們的數據,我們推斷出最大股東是羅伯特·杜根(Robert Duggan)(他還擁有最高關鍵高管的頭銜),其已發行股份的70%。當內部人士擁有公司大量股份時,這通常被認爲是一個好兆頭,在這種情況下,我們很高興看到公司內部人士扮演關鍵利益相關者的角色。相比之下,第二和第三大股東持有約1.7%和1.4%的股份。
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. Our information suggests that there isn't any analyst coverage of the stock, so it is probably little known.
雖然研究公司的機構所有權數據是有意義的,但研究分析師的情緒以了解風向哪個方向吹來也是有意義的。我們的信息表明,分析師對該股沒有任何報道,因此可能鮮爲人知。
Insider Ownership Of Pulse Biosciences
脈衝生物科學的內部所有權
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.
儘管內部人士的確切定義可能是主觀的,但幾乎每個人都認爲董事會成員是內部人士。公司管理層經營業務,但首席執行官將對董事會負責,即使他或她是董事會成員。
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.
我通常認爲內部所有權是一件好事。但是,在某些情況下,這使其他股東更難追究董事會對決策的責任。
It seems that insiders own more than half the Pulse Biosciences, Inc. stock. This gives them a lot of power. Given it has a market cap of US$908m, that means they have US$648m worth of shares. It is good to see this level of investment. You can check here to see if those insiders have been buying recently.
內部人士似乎擁有Pulse Biosciences, Inc.一半以上的股票。這賦予了他們很大的力量。鑑於其市值爲9.08億美元,這意味着他們擁有價值6.48億美元的股票。很高興看到這樣的投資水平。你可以在這裏查看這些內部人士最近是否在買入。
General Public Ownership
一般公有制
With a 20% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over Pulse Biosciences. 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.
擁有20%所有權的公衆(主要由個人投資者組成)對Pulse Biosciences有一定程度的影響力。這種所有權規模雖然可觀,但如果決策與其他大股東不同步,可能不足以改變公司政策。
Next Steps:
後續步驟:
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. Take risks for example - Pulse Biosciences has 4 warning signs (and 3 which can't be ignored) we think you should know about.
我覺得看看究竟誰擁有一家公司非常有趣。但是,要真正獲得見解,我們還需要考慮其他信息。以風險爲例——Pulse Biosciences有4個警告信號(其中3個不容忽視),我們認爲你應該知道。
If you would prefer check out another company -- one with potentially superior financials -- then do not miss this free list of interesting companies, backed by strong financial data.
如果你更願意去另一家公司看看,一家財務狀況可能更好,那麼千萬不要錯過這份由強勁財務數據支持的有趣公司的免費名單。
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:本文中的數字是使用過去十二個月的數據計算得出的,這些數據是指截至財務報表日期當月最後一天的12個月期間。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.
對這篇文章有反饋嗎?對內容感到擔憂嗎?請直接聯繫我們。或者,也可以發送電子郵件至編輯團隊 (at) simplywallst.com。
Simply Wall St的這篇文章本質上是籠統的。我們僅使用公正的方法根據歷史數據和分析師的預測提供評論,我們的文章無意作爲財務建議。它不構成買入或賣出任何股票的建議,也沒有考慮到您的目標或財務狀況。我們的目標是爲您提供由基本數據驅動的長期重點分析。請注意,我們的分析可能不考慮最新的價格敏感型公司公告或定性材料。簡而言之,華爾街沒有持有任何上述股票的頭寸。
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com
對這篇文章有反饋嗎?擔心內容嗎?直接聯繫我們。或者,發送電子郵件至 editorial-team@simplywallst.com