With 75% Ownership, Brady Corporation (NYSE:BRC) Boasts of Strong Institutional Backing
With 75% Ownership, Brady Corporation (NYSE:BRC) Boasts of Strong Institutional Backing
Key Insights
主要見解
- Significantly high institutional ownership implies Brady's stock price is sensitive to their trading actions
- 50% of the business is held by the top 10 shareholders
- Recent sales by insiders
- 機構擁有的股份比例顯著高,這意味着布雷迪的股價對他們的交易行爲非常敏感
- 前10大股東持有50%的股份。
- 最近由內部人士出售。
To get a sense of who is truly in control of Brady Corporation (NYSE:BRC), 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 75% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.
要了解布雷迪公司(紐交所:BRC)真正控制權的感覺,重要的是要了解企業的所有權結構。我們可以看到,機構擁有該公司75%的股權。換句話說,這個集團從對公司的投資中獲得(或者失去)最多。
Given the vast amount of money and research capacities at their disposal, institutional ownership tends to carry a lot of weight, especially with individual investors. Hence, having a considerable amount of institutional money invested in a company is often regarded as a desirable trait.
由於他們擁有的巨額資金和研究能力,機構所有權往往具有很大的影響力,特別是對於個人投資者來說。因此,擁有大量機構資金投資於公司往往被認爲是一種令人嚮往的品質。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Brady.
讓我們仔細看一下,不同類型的股東可以告訴我們關於布雷迪的一些信息。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Brady?
機構持股告訴我們有關布雷迪的什麼?
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。
We can see that Brady does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. 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. 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 Brady, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
我們可以看到布雷迪確實有機構投資者,他們持有公司的一大部分股份。這表明在專業投資者中具有一定的信譽。但我們不能單純依賴這個事實,因爲機構有時會做出糟糕的投資,就像其他人一樣。如果兩家大型機構投資者同時試圖拋售某支股票,很可能會導致股價大幅下跌。因此值得檢查布雷迪的過去收益軌跡(如下)。當然,也要記住還有其他因素需要考慮。
Investors should note that institutions actually own more than half the company, so they can collectively wield significant power. Hedge funds don't have many shares in Brady. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is The Vanguard Group, Inc. with 11% of shares outstanding. For context, the second largest shareholder holds about 9.6% of the shares outstanding, followed by an ownership of 9.4% by the third-largest shareholder. Elizabeth Bruno, who is the third-largest shareholder, also happens to hold the title of Member of the Board of Directors.
投資者應該注意,實際上,機構擁有公司超過一半的股份,因此他們可以共同行使重要影響力。對於Brady,對沖基金持有的股份並不多。從我們的數據來看,最大的股東是The Vanguard Group,Inc.,持有股份的11%。爲了更好理解,第二大股東持有約9.6%的股份,第三大股東持有9.4%的股份。第三大股東Elizabeth Bruno同時也是董事會成員。
We also observed that the top 10 shareholders account for more than half of the share register, with a few smaller shareholders to balance the interests of the larger ones to a certain extent.
我們還觀察到,前10大股東持有超過半數股份,有一些較小的股東以一定程度上平衡更大股東的利益。
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. Quite a few analysts cover the stock, so you could look into forecast growth quite easily.
雖然研究一個公司的機構持股數據是有意義的,但研究分析師預期增長也是有意義的,因爲很多分析師都有關注這些股票,因此可以很容易地了解預期增長。
Insider Ownership Of Brady
Brady的內部股權
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. 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.
公司內部人員的定義可能是主觀的,並在不同的司法管轄區之間有所不同。我們的數據反映了個人內部人員,至少包括董事會成員。管理層最終向董事會負責。然而,經理們成爲執行董事會成員並不罕見,尤其是如果他們是創始人或首席執行官。
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。
We can see that insiders own shares in Brady Corporation. It is a pretty big company, so it is generally a positive to see some potentially meaningful alignment. In this case, they own around US$357m worth of shares (at current prices). Most would say this shows alignment of interests between shareholders and the board. Still, it might be worth checking if those insiders have been selling.
我們可以看到,內部持有Brady Corporation的股份。 這是一家相當大的公司,因此看到一些潛在有意義的一致性通常是積極的。 在這種情況下,他們持有價值約35700萬美元的股份(按當前價格計算)。 大多數人會說這顯示了股東和董事會之間的利益一致。 儘管如此,值得看看這些內部人員是否一直在拋售。
General Public Ownership
一般大衆所有權
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 15% stake in Brady. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
普通投資大衆,通常是個人投資者,在Brady持有15%的股份。 雖然這一群體不一定能決定事情,但肯定會對公司的運行產生實質影響。
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. Case in point: We've spotted 1 warning sign for Brady you should be aware of.
我發現查看一家公司的所有者非常有趣。但爲了真正獲得洞察,我們也需要考慮其他信息。舉個例子:我們發現了一處布雷迪的1個警告信號,你應該注意。
Ultimately the future is most important. You can access this free report on analyst forecasts for the company.
最終,未來最重要。您可以在這份關於該公司分析師預測的免費報告中獲取有關信息。
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。