In the Wake of Redfin Corporation's (NASDAQ:RDFN) Latest US$55m Market Cap Drop, Institutional Owners May Be Forced to Take Severe Actions
In the Wake of Redfin Corporation's (NASDAQ:RDFN) Latest US$55m Market Cap Drop, Institutional Owners May Be Forced to Take Severe Actions
Key Insights
關鍵見解
- Institutions' substantial holdings in Redfin implies that they have significant influence over the company's share price
- A total of 25 investors have a majority stake in the company with 50% ownership
- Using data from analyst forecasts alongside ownership research, one can better assess the future performance of a company
- 機構對Redfin的大量持股意味着它們對公司的股價具有重大影響
- 共有25名投資者持有該公司的多數股權,所有權爲50%
- 使用分析師預測的數據以及所有權研究,可以更好地評估公司的未來表現
If you want to know who really controls Redfin Corporation (NASDAQ:RDFN), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. With 62% stake, institutions 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.
如果你想知道誰真正控制了雷德芬公司(納斯達克股票代碼:RDFN),那麼你必須看看其股票登記處的構成。機構擁有62%的股份,是公司的最大股份。換句話說,該集團將從對公司的投資中獲得最多(或損失最大)。
And institutional investors endured the highest losses after the company's share price fell by 4.6% last week. Needless to say, the recent loss which further adds to the one-year loss to shareholders of 5.4% might not go down well especially with this category of shareholders. Also referred to as "smart money", institutions have a lot of sway over how a stock's price moves. As a result, if the downtrend continues, institutions may face pressures to sell Redfin, which might have negative implications on individual investors.
在上週該公司股價下跌4.6%之後,機構投資者遭受的損失最大。毋庸置疑,最近的虧損進一步加劇了股東一年虧損5.4%,但下降幅度可能不大,尤其是對於這類股東而言。也被稱爲 「智能貨幣」,機構對股票價格的走勢有很大的影響力。因此,如果下跌趨勢持續下去,機構可能會面臨出售Redfin的壓力,這可能會對個人投資者產生負面影響。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Redfin.
讓我們仔細看看不同類型的股東能告訴我們關於Redfin的什麼。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Redfin?
關於Redfin,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用指數的回報進行比較。因此,他們通常會考慮收購包含在相關基準指數中的大型公司。
We can see that Redfin does have institutional investors; and they hold a good portion of the company's stock. 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 Redfin's earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters.
我們可以看到,Redfin確實有機構投資者;他們持有公司很大一部分股票。這意味着在這些機構工作的分析師已經看過這隻股票,他們很喜歡。但是就像其他人一樣,他們可能錯了。如果多家機構同時改變對股票的看法,你可能會看到股價快速下跌。因此,值得在下面查看Redfin的收益記錄。當然,未來才是真正重要的。
Institutional investors own over 50% of the company, so together than can probably strongly influence board decisions. Redfin is not owned by hedge funds. Looking at our data, we can see that the largest shareholder is The Vanguard Group, Inc. with 14% of shares outstanding. For context, the second largest shareholder holds about 7.6% of the shares outstanding, followed by an ownership of 2.4% by the third-largest shareholder. Furthermore, CEO Glenn Kelman is the owner of 1.2% of the company's shares.
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。Redfin 不歸對沖基金所有。從我們的數據來看,我們可以看到最大的股東是Vanguard Group, Inc.,其已發行股份爲14%。就背景而言,第二大股東持有約7.6%的已發行股份,其次是第三大股東持有2.4%的所有權。此外,首席執行官格倫·凱爾曼持有該公司1.2%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.
我們的研究表明,前25名股東共同控制的公司股份不到一半,這意味着該公司的股票分佈廣泛,沒有占主導地位的股東。
Researching institutional ownership is a good way to gauge and filter a stock's expected performance. The same can be achieved by studying analyst sentiments. Quite a few analysts cover the stock, so you could look into forecast growth quite easily.
研究機構所有權是衡量和篩選股票預期表現的好方法。通過研究分析師的情緒也可以實現同樣的目標。有不少分析師報道了該股,因此您可以很容易地研究預測的增長。
Insider Ownership Of Redfin
Redfin 的內部所有權
The definition of an insider can differ slightly between different countries, but members of the board of directors always count. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.
不同國家對內部人員的定義可能略有不同,但董事會成員總是計算在內。公司管理層經營業務,但首席執行官將向董事會負責,即使他或她是董事會成員。
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.
當內部所有權表明領導層像公司的真正所有者一樣思考時,內部所有權是積極的。但是,高內部所有權也可以賦予公司內部一小部分人巨大的權力。在某些情況下,這可能是負面的。
We can report that insiders do own shares in Redfin Corporation. The insiders have a meaningful stake worth US$52m. Most would see this as a real positive. If you would like to explore the question of insider alignment, you can click here to see if insiders have been buying or selling.
我們可以報告說,內部人士確實擁有Redfin公司的股份。內部人士持有價值5200萬美元的大量股份。大多數人會認爲這是一個真正的積極因素。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
普通公有制
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 33% stake in Redfin. 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.
公衆通常是個人投資者,持有Redfin33%的股份。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. To that end, you should learn about the 4 warning signs we've spotted with Redfin (including 1 which can't be ignored) .
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。爲此,你應該了解我們在Redfin身上發現的4個警告信號(包括一個不容忽視的信號)。
Ultimately the future is most important. You can access this free report on analyst forecasts for the company.
歸根結底,未來是最重要的。您可以訪問這份關於公司分析師預測的免費報告。
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日期的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。