MFA Financial, Inc.'s (NYSE:MFA) Institutional Investors Lost 4.2% Last Week but Have Benefitted From Longer-term Gains
MFA Financial, Inc.'s (NYSE:MFA) Institutional Investors Lost 4.2% Last Week but Have Benefitted From Longer-term Gains
Key Insights
關鍵見解
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, MFA Financial's stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- The top 15 shareholders own 50% of the company
- Analyst forecasts along with ownership data serve to give a strong idea about prospects for a business
- 鑑於機構持有該股的大量股份,MFA Financial的股價可能容易受到其交易決策的影響
- 前15名股東擁有公司50%的股份
- 分析師的預測以及所有權數據可以使人們對企業前景有深刻的了解
To get a sense of who is truly in control of MFA Financial, Inc. (NYSE:MFA), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. We can see that institutions own the lion's share in the company with 67% ownership. That is, the group stands to benefit the most if the stock rises (or lose the most if there is a downturn).
要了解誰真正控制了MFA Financial, Inc.(紐約證券交易所代碼:MFA),了解業務的所有權結構很重要。我們可以看到,機構擁有該公司的大部分股份,所有權爲67%。也就是說,如果股票上漲,該集團將受益最大(如果出現低迷,則損失最大)。
Institutional investors was the group most impacted after the company's market cap fell to US$1.1b last week. However, the 19% one-year returns may have helped alleviate their overall losses. We would assume however, that they would be on the lookout for weakness in the future.
上週該公司的市值跌至11億美元后,機構投資者是受影響最大的群體。但是,19%的一年期回報率可能有助於減輕他們的總體損失。但是,我們假設他們將來會注意弱點。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about MFA Financial.
讓我們仔細看看不同類型的股東能告訴我們有關MFA Financial的信息。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About MFA Financial?
關於MFA Financial,機構所有權告訴我們什麼?
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指數的回報進行比較。因此,他們通常會考慮收購相關基準指數中包含的大型公司。
MFA Financial 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. When multiple institutions own a stock, there's always a risk that they are in a 'crowded trade'. When such a trade goes wrong, multiple parties may compete to sell stock fast. This risk is higher in a company without a history of growth. You can see MFA Financial's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
MFA Financial已經在股票登記處設立了機構。事實上,他們擁有該公司可觀的股份。這表明專業投資者有一定的信譽。但是我們不能僅僅依靠這個事實,因爲機構有時會像所有人一樣進行不良投資。當多家機構擁有一隻股票時,總是存在處於 「擁擠交易」 的風險。當這樣的交易出錯時,多方可能會競相快速出售股票。對於沒有增長曆史的公司,這種風險更高。你可以在下面看到MFA Financial的歷史收益和收入,但請記住,故事總是有更多內容。
Institutional investors own over 50% of the company, so together than can probably strongly influence board decisions. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in MFA Financial. Wellington Management Group LLP is currently the company's largest shareholder with 11% of shares outstanding. With 9.9% and 9.4% of the shares outstanding respectively, The Vanguard Group, Inc. and BlackRock, Inc. are the second and third largest shareholders. Additionally, the company's CEO Craig Knutson directly holds 0.6% of the total shares outstanding.
機構投資者擁有公司50%以上的股份,因此加在一起可能會對董事會的決策產生重大影響。我們注意到,對沖基金沒有對MFA Financial進行有意義的投資。惠靈頓管理集團有限責任公司目前是該公司的最大股東,已發行股份的11%。Vanguard Group, Inc.和貝萊德公司分別擁有9.9%和9.4%的已發行股份,是第二和第三大股東。此外,該公司首席執行官克雷格·納特森直接持有已發行股份總額的0.6%。
Looking at the shareholder registry, we can see that 50% of the ownership is controlled by the top 15 shareholders, meaning that no single shareholder has a majority interest in the ownership.
從股東登記處來看,我們可以看到50%的所有權由前15名股東控制,這意味着沒有一個股東在所有權中擁有多數股權。
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 a reasonable number of analysts covering the stock, so it might be useful to find out their aggregate view on the future.
雖然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以更深入地了解股票的預期表現也是一種好做法。有相當數量的分析師在報道該股,因此了解他們對未來的總體看法可能很有用。
Insider Ownership Of MFA Financial
MFA Financial的內部所有權
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO.
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。管理層最終對董事會負責。但是,經理成爲執行委員會成員的情況並不少見,尤其是當他們是創始人或首席執行官時。
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。
We can see that insiders own shares in MFA Financial, Inc.. This is a big company, so it is good to see this level of alignment. Insiders own US$16m worth of shares (at current prices). If you would like to explore the question of insider alignment, you can click here to see if insiders have been buying or selling.
我們可以看到內部人士擁有MFA Financial, Inc.的股份。這是一家大公司,因此很高興看到這種一致性。內部人士擁有價值1600萬美元的股票(按當前價格計算)。如果您想探討內幕調整問題,可以點擊此處查看內部人士是否在買入或賣出。
General Public Ownership
一般公有制
With a 31% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over MFA Financial. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
擁有31%的所有權的公衆(主要由個人投資者組成)對MFA Financial有一定程度的影響力。儘管這個群體不一定能做主,但它肯定會對公司的運作方式產生真正的影響。
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 - MFA Financial has 3 warning signs (and 2 which make us uncomfortable) 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——MFA Financial有3個警告信號(其中2個讓我們感到不舒服),我們認爲你應該知道。
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.
但歸根結底,決定這家企業所有者的表現的是未來,而不是過去。因此,我們認爲最好看一下這份免費報告,該報告顯示了分析師是否預測了更光明的未來。
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?擔心內容嗎?直接聯繫我們。或者,發送電子郵件給編輯組(網址爲)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提供基於歷史數據和分析師預測的評論,我們的文章並非旨在提供財務建議。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,我們的分析可能不會考慮最新的價格敏感型公司公告或定性材料。華爾街只是沒有持有上述任何股票的頭寸。