The Clorox Company (NYSE:CLX) Is a Favorite Amongst Institutional Investors Who Own 81%
The Clorox Company (NYSE:CLX) Is a Favorite Amongst Institutional Investors Who Own 81%
Key Insights
主要見解
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, Clorox's stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- 50% of the business is held by the top 24 shareholders
- Analyst forecasts along with ownership data serve to give a strong idea about prospects for a business
- 鑑於機構在該股票中擁有大量股份,高樂氏的股價可能會受到它們的交易決策的影響。
- 最高的24位股東持有公司50%的股份。
- 分析師預測以及所有者數據可以給我們提供有關業務前景的強烈想法。
Every investor in The Clorox Company (NYSE:CLX) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are institutions with 81% ownership. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
高樂氏公司(紐交所:CLX)的每個投資者都應該知道最大的股東集團。其中持有81%股份的是機構。換句話說,該集團面臨的上漲潛力(或下跌風險)最大。
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. As a result, a sizeable amount of institutional money invested in a firm is generally viewed as a positive attribute.
由於機構擁有大量的資金和研究能力,因此機構所有權往往具有相當的分量,特別是對於個人投資者。因此,機構在一家企業中投資的規模可視爲該企業的一項重要資產。
Let's delve deeper into each type of owner of Clorox, beginning with the chart below.
讓我們深入了解高樂氏的每個所有者類型,從下面的圖表開始。
![big](https://newsfile.futunn.com/public/NN-PersistNewsContentImage/7781/20240724/0-16edfe82d59f84bdcbed2d307ad26ff1-0-7dd2218f211ffe80a10d6497de3e7e90.png/big)
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Clorox?
機構持股對高樂氏告訴我們什麼?
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。
Clorox already has institutions on the share registry. Indeed, they own a respectable stake in the company. 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. 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 Clorox, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
高樂氏已經被機構佔據了一席之地。實際上,它們在公司裏擁有相當一部分的股份。這意味着那些機構的分析師已經觀察了這隻股票,並且他們喜歡它。但和其他人一樣,他們也可能錯。如果兩家大型機構投資者同時試圖拋售股票,通常會看到股價大幅下跌。因此,檢查高樂氏的過去收益軌跡(如下圖)也是值得的。當然,還要記得還有其他要考慮的因素。
![big](https://newsfile.futunn.com/public/NN-PersistNewsContentImage/7781/20240724/0-16edfe82d59f84bdcbed2d307ad26ff1-1-4ccc7c347f5c6eff1f77ab6d612aa590.png/big)
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 Clorox. The company's largest shareholder is The Vanguard Group, Inc., with ownership of 12%. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 8.5% and 6.5% of the stock.
投資者應該注意,實際上機構擁有公司超過一半的股份,所以它們可以集體行使重大影響力。對於高樂氏來說,對沖基金股份不多。該公司最大的股東是先鋒集團(持有12%的股份)。相比之下,第二大和第三大股東持有約8.5%和6.5%的股份。
After doing some more digging, we found that the top 24 have the combined ownership of 50% in the company, suggesting that no single shareholder has significant control over the company.
在進行更多的挖掘後,我們發現前24個股東在該公司擁有50%的綜合所有權,這意味着沒有單一股東對公司具有重要控制力。
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.
儘管研究公司機構所有權數據是有意義的,但了解分析師的情緒也很有意義,以了解市場的走向。因爲有很多分析師正在跟蹤這個股票,所以看看他們的預測可能是值得的。
Insider Ownership Of Clorox
高樂氏的內部所有權
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.
雖然內部人員的具體定義可能是主觀的,但幾乎所有人都認爲董事會成員是內部人員。公司管理層應向董事會回答問題,後者應代表股東的利益。值得注意的是,有時高層管理人員也會成爲董事會成員。
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。
Our information suggests that The Clorox Company insiders own under 1% of the company. Being so large, we would not expect insiders to own a large proportion of the stock. Collectively, they own US$21m of stock. In this sort of situation, it can be more interesting to see if those insiders have been buying or selling.
我們的信息表明,高樂氏公司的內部人士擁有公司不到1%的股份。由於公司規模巨大,我們不會期望內部人士擁有大量股票。他們共擁有2100萬美元的股票。在這種情況下,更有趣的是查看這些內部人士是否一直在買入或賣出。
General Public Ownership
一般大衆所有權
The general public-- including retail investors -- own 19% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. 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,包括散戶投資者,在該公司擁有19%的股份,因此不容忽視。雖然這個群體不能決定大局,但它肯定會對公司的經營產生實際影響。
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 3 warning signs for Clorox you should be aware of, and 1 of them shouldn't be ignored.
我認爲看一家公司的實際所有者非常有趣。但爲了真正獲得洞察力,我們還需要考慮其他信息。例如:我們已經發現了高樂氏的3個警示信號,你應該注意其中的1個。
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。
Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@simplywallst.com
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。
譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。