O'Reilly Automotive, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:ORLY) Institutional Investors Lost 4.1% Last Week but Have Benefitted From Longer-term Gains
O'Reilly Automotive, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:ORLY) Institutional Investors Lost 4.1% Last Week but Have Benefitted From Longer-term Gains
Key Insights
關鍵洞察
- Institutions' substantial holdings in O'Reilly Automotive implies that they have significant influence over the company's share price
- The top 25 shareholders own 51% of the company
- Insiders have sold recently
- 機構在奧萊利的重大持股意味着他們對公司股價有顯著影響
- 前25大股東擁有公司51%的股份
- 內部人士最近出售了股票。
To get a sense of who is truly in control of O'Reilly Automotive, Inc. (NASDAQ:ORLY), 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 87% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.
要了解誰真正控制着奧萊利自動化公司(納斯達克:ORLY),理解業務的所有權結構非常重要。我們可以看到機構在公司中佔有87%的主要股份。換句話說,該集團在對公司的投資中將獲得最多(或失去最多)。
Institutional investors endured the highest losses after the company's market cap fell by US$3.0b last week. However, the 28% one-year return to shareholders may have helped lessen their pain. But they would probably be wary of future losses.
機構投資者在公司市值在上週下降30億美元后承受了最高損失。然而,對股東而言28%的年回報可能幫助減輕了他們的痛苦。但他們可能會對未來的損失感到警惕。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about O'Reilly Automotive.
讓我們仔細看看不同類型的股東能告訴我們有關奧萊利的信息。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About O'Reilly Automotive?
機構所有權告訴我們關於奧萊利汽車公司的什麼?
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.
機構通常在向自己的投資者報告時,會與基準進行比較,因此一旦股票被納入主要指數,他們通常對該股票會更加熱情。我們預期大多數公司在登記時都會有一些機構,尤其是當它們正在增長時。
As you can see, institutional investors have a fair amount of stake in O'Reilly Automotive. 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. 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 O'Reilly Automotive's historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
正如你所看到的,機構投資者在奧萊利擁有相當數量的股份。這可能表明該公司在投資社區中具有一定的可信度。然而,最好對依賴機構投資者帶來的所謂認可保持謹慎。他們有時也會犯錯。當多家機構持有一隻股票時,總是存在「擁擠交易」的風險。當這樣的交易出錯時,多個參與者可能會競爭迅速賣出股票。這種風險在沒有增長曆史的公司中更高。你可以在下面看到奧萊利的歷史收益和營業收入,但請記住,事情總是有更多的故事。
Since institutional investors own more than half the issued stock, the board will likely have to pay attention to their preferences. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in O'Reilly Automotive. The Vanguard Group, Inc. is currently the company's largest shareholder with 8.9% of shares outstanding. Meanwhile, the second and third largest shareholders, hold 7.0% and 4.2%, of the shares outstanding, respectively.
由於機構投資者擁有超過一半的已發行股票,董事會可能需要關注他們的偏好。我們注意到對奧萊利的對沖基金沒有進行有意義的投資。先鋒集團目前是公司的最大股東,持有8.9%的流通股份。同時,第二和第三大股東分別持有7.0%和4.2%的流通股份。
A closer look at our ownership figures suggests that the top 25 shareholders have a combined ownership of 51% implying that no single shareholder has a majority.
仔細查看我們的股權數據,前25大股東的累計持股達到51%,這意味着沒有單一股東擁有多數股權。
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 a reasonable number of analysts covering the stock, so it might be useful to find out their aggregate view on the future.
雖然研究一家公司的機構持股數據是有意義的,但研究分析師的情緒以了解市場趨勢同樣也是有意義的。現在有相當多的分析師關注這隻股票,因此了解他們對未來的整體看法可能會很有用。
Insider Ownership Of O'Reilly Automotive
奧萊利汽車公司的內部股東
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. 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.
雖然對內幕人的確切定義可能是主觀的,但幾乎所有人都認爲董事會成員是內幕人。公司管理層向董事會負責,後者應該代表股東的利益。值得注意的是,有時候高層管理者自己也是董事會成員。
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.
我通常認爲內部人擁有股份是一件好事。然而,在某些情況下,這使得其他股東更難讓董事會對決策負責。
Our data suggests that insiders own under 1% of O'Reilly Automotive, Inc. in their own names. As it is a large company, we'd only expect insiders to own a small percentage of it. But it's worth noting that they own US$591m worth of shares. It is good to see board members owning shares, but it might be worth checking if those insiders have been buying.
我們的數據顯示,內部人士在奧萊利汽車公司名下擁有不到1%的股份。作爲一家大型公司,我們僅期望內部人士擁有一小部分股份。但值得注意的是,他們持有價值59100萬美元的股份。看到董事會成員持有股份是件好事,但值得檢查一下這些內部人士是否有在買入。
General Public Ownership
公衆持股
With a 13% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over O'Reilly Automotive. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
一般公衆擁有13%的股份,主要由個人投資者組成,對奧萊利汽車公司有一定的影響力。雖然這個群體不一定能決定公司事務,但確實能夠對公司的運營產生真實的影響。
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. Consider for instance, the ever-present spectre of investment risk. We've identified 3 warning signs with O'Reilly Automotive (at least 1 which can't be ignored) , and understanding them should be part of your investment process.
我發現了解一個公司的真正擁有者非常有趣。但要真正獲得洞察,我們還需要考慮其他信息。考慮到始終存在的投資風險。我們已經確定了奧萊利汽車的三個警示信號(至少一個是不能忽視的),理解這些信號應該是您投資過程的一部分。
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.
但最終,決定這個業務的所有者表現如何的,是未來而不是過去。因此,我們認爲查看這份免費的報告是明智的,報告顯示分析師是否預測了一個更光明的未來。
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:本文中的數字是根據過去十二個月的數據計算得出的,指的是截至財務報表日期的月份最後一天的12個月期間。這可能與完整年度的年報數字不一致。
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.
對本文有反饋?對內容有疑慮?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至 editorial-team (at) simplywallst.com。
這篇來自Simply Wall ST的文章是一般性的。我們根據歷史數據和分析師預測提供評論,採用無偏見的方法,我們的文章並不旨在提供財務建議。它不構成對任何股票的買入或賣出建議,也未考慮到您的目標或財務狀況。我們旨在爲您提供以基本數據驅動的長期分析。請注意,我們的分析可能未考慮最新的價格敏感公司公告或定性材料。Simply Wall ST在提到的任何股票中均沒有持倉。