PepsiCo, Inc. (NASDAQ:PEP) Is Largely Controlled by Institutional Shareholders Who Own 75% of the Company
PepsiCo, Inc. (NASDAQ:PEP) Is Largely Controlled by Institutional Shareholders Who Own 75% of the Company
Key Insights
关键见解
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, PepsiCo's stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- 41% of the business is held by the top 25 shareholders
- Insiders have sold recently
- 鉴于机构持有该股的大量股份,百事可乐的股价可能容易受到其交易决策的影响
- 41% 的业务由前 25 名股东持有
- 业内人士最近卖出了
If you want to know who really controls PepsiCo, Inc. (NASDAQ:PEP), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. We can see that institutions own the lion's share in the company with 75% ownership. That is, the group stands to benefit the most if the stock rises (or lose the most if there is a downturn).
如果你想知道谁真正控制了百事可乐公司(纳斯达克股票代码:PEP),那么你必须看看其股票登记处的构成。我们可以看到,机构拥有该公司的大部分股份,所有权为75%。也就是说,如果股票上涨,该集团将受益最大(如果出现低迷,则损失最大)。
Because institutional owners have a huge pool of resources and liquidity, their investing decisions tend to carry a great deal of weight, especially with individual investors. Therefore, a good portion of institutional money invested in the company is usually a huge vote of confidence on its future.
由于机构所有者拥有庞大的资源和流动性,他们的投资决策往往具有很大的分量,尤其是对于个人投资者而言。因此,投资于公司的机构资金中有很大一部分通常是对公司未来的巨大信任票。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of PepsiCo.
在下图中,我们放大了百事可乐的不同所有权群体。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About PepsiCo?
关于百事可乐,机构所有权告诉我们什么?
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.
许多机构根据近似于当地市场的指数来衡量自己的表现。因此,他们通常会更多地关注主要指数中包含的公司。
PepsiCo 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 PepsiCo's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
百事可乐已经在股票登记处设立了机构。事实上,他们拥有该公司可观的股份。这表明专业投资者有一定的信誉。但是我们不能仅仅依靠这个事实,因为机构有时会像所有人一样进行不良投资。当多家机构拥有一只股票时,总是存在处于 “拥挤交易” 的风险。当这样的交易出错时,多方可能会竞相快速出售股票。对于没有增长历史的公司,这种风险更高。你可以在下面看到百事可乐的历史收益和收入,但请记住,故事总是有更多内容。
Investors should note that institutions actually own more than half the company, so they can collectively wield significant power. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in PepsiCo. The Vanguard Group, Inc. is currently the largest shareholder, with 9.5% of shares outstanding. BlackRock, Inc. is the second largest shareholder owning 8.0% of common stock, and State Street Global Advisors, Inc. holds about 4.0% of the company stock.
投资者应注意,机构实际上拥有公司一半以上的股份,因此它们可以共同行使巨大的权力。我们注意到,对冲基金没有对百事可乐进行有意义的投资。Vanguard Group, Inc.目前是最大股东,已发行股份的9.5%。贝莱德公司是第二大股东,拥有8.0%的普通股,道富环球顾问公司持有该公司约4.0%的股份。
Our studies suggest that the top 25 shareholders collectively control less than half of the company's shares, meaning that the company's shares are widely disseminated and there is no dominant shareholder.
我们的研究表明,前25名股东共同控制的公司股份不到一半,这意味着该公司的股票分布广泛,没有占主导地位的股东。
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 are plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.
虽然研究公司的机构所有权数据是有意义的,但研究分析师的情绪以了解风向哪个方向吹来也是有意义的。有很多分析师在报道该股,因此可能也值得一看他们的预测。
Insider Ownership Of PepsiCo
百事可乐的内部所有权
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. The company management answer to the board and the latter should represent the interests of shareholders. Notably, sometimes top-level managers are on the board themselves.
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之间确实有所不同。我们的数据反映了个人内部人士,至少涵盖了董事会成员。公司管理层对董事会负责,后者应代表股东的利益。值得注意的是,有时高层管理人员自己也是董事会成员。
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.
我通常认为内部所有权是一件好事。但是,在某些情况下,这使其他股东更难追究董事会对决策的责任。
Our most recent data indicates that insiders own less than 1% of PepsiCo, Inc.. It is a very large company, so it would be surprising to see insiders own a large proportion of the company. Though their holding amounts to less than 1%, we can see that board members collectively own US$327m worth of shares (at current prices). It is good to see board members owning shares, but it might be worth checking if those insiders have been buying.
我们最新的数据显示,内部人士拥有百事可乐公司不到1%的股份。这是一家非常大的公司,因此看到内部人士拥有该公司的很大一部分股份会令人惊讶。尽管他们的持股量不到1%,但我们可以看到董事会成员共拥有价值3.27亿美元的股票(按当前价格计算)。很高兴看到董事会成员拥有股票,但可能值得检查一下这些内部人士是否在买入。
General Public Ownership
一般公有制
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 25% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. 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.
包括散户投资者在内的公众拥有该公司25%的股份,因此不容忽视。尽管这种所有权规模可能不足以影响对他们有利的政策决定,但它们仍然可以对公司政策产生集体影响。
Next Steps:
后续步骤:
It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand PepsiCo better, we need to consider many other factors. Be aware that PepsiCo is showing 3 warning signs in our investment analysis , you should know about...
拥有公司股份的不同群体总是值得考虑的。但是,为了更好地了解百事可乐,我们需要考虑许多其他因素。请注意,百事可乐在我们的投资分析中显示出3个警告信号,您应该知道...
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.
但归根结底,决定这家企业所有者的表现的是未来,而不是过去。因此,我们认为最好看一下这份免费报告,该报告显示了分析师是否预测了更光明的未来。
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:本文中的数字是使用过去十二个月的数据计算得出的,这些数据是指截至财务报表日期当月最后一天的12个月期间。这可能与全年年度报告数据不一致。
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.
对这篇文章有反馈吗?对内容感到担忧?直接联系我们。 或者,给编辑团队 (at) simplywallst.com 发送电子邮件。
Simply Wall St的这篇文章本质上是笼统的。我们仅使用公正的方法根据历史数据和分析师的预测提供评论,我们的文章无意作为财务建议。它不构成买入或卖出任何股票的建议,也没有考虑到您的目标或财务状况。我们的目标是为您提供由基本数据驱动的长期重点分析。请注意,我们的分析可能不考虑最新的价格敏感型公司公告或定性材料。简而言之,华尔街没有持有任何上述股票的头寸。