Palomar Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLMR) Is Largely Controlled by Institutional Shareholders Who Own 87% of the Company
Palomar Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLMR) Is Largely Controlled by Institutional Shareholders Who Own 87% of the Company
Key Insights
主要見解
- Institutions' substantial holdings in Palomar Holdings implies that they have significant influence over the company's share price
- 51% of the business is held by the top 11 shareholders
- Insiders have been selling lately
- 機構在Palomar Holdings的大量持有權暗示着他們對公司股價有重大影響
- 企業前11大股東持有其51%的股份。
- 內部人員最近一直在賣出。
To get a sense of who is truly in control of Palomar Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLMR), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. With 87% 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.
要了解真正掌控Palomar Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ:PLMR)的人,重要的是了解該業務的所有權結構。 機構持有87%的股份,是該公司中持有最多股票的機構。 換句話說,這個群體將從他們對公司的投資中獲得最大利潤(或者損失最大)。
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. Hence, having a considerable amount of institutional money invested in a company is often regarded as a desirable trait.
由於機構業主擁有巨額資源和流動性資產,他們的投資決策往往具有很大的影響力,尤其是對個人投資者。因此,擁有大量機構資金投資於一家公司通常被視爲一種理想的特徵。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Palomar Holdings.
讓我們仔細觀察一下,看看不同類型的股東可以告訴我們有關Palomar Holdings的信息。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Palomar Holdings?
機構持股告訴我們有關Palomar Holdings的什麼?
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見的指數回報進行比較。因此,他們通常會考慮購買包括在相關基準指數中的較大公司。
Palomar Holdings 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. 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 Palomar Holdings, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
Palomar Holdings在股東名冊上已經有一些機構。實際上,他們在公司中持有可觀的股份。這表明在專業投資者中有一定的信譽。但我們不能僅僅依靠這個事實,因爲有時機構會做出糟糕的投資,就像每個人一樣。如果兩家大型機構投資者同時試圖拋售一支股票,很常見會看到股價大幅下跌。因此,值得檢查Palomar Holdings的過去收益軌跡(如下所示)。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. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Palomar Holdings. BlackRock, Inc. is currently the largest shareholder, with 15% of shares outstanding. In comparison, the second and third largest shareholders hold about 9.0% and 5.1% of the stock. In addition, we found that D. Armstrong, the CEO has 1.9% of the shares allocated to their name.
投資者應該注意,機構實際上擁有公司超過一半的股份,因此它們共同擁有相當大的權力。我們注意到,對Palomar Holdings沒有意義的對沖基金。黑石集團目前是最大的股東,持有15%的股份。相比之下,第二和第三大股東持有約9.0%和5.1%的股份。此外,我們發現首席執行官D. Armstrong名下有1.9%的股份。
A closer look at our ownership figures suggests that the top 11 shareholders have a combined ownership of 51% implying that no single shareholder has a majority.
更詳細地看一下我們的所有權數據顯示,前11名股東擁有組合所有權的51%,這意味着沒有單一股東擁有多數股份。
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.
雖然仔細研究公司的機構持股數據是有意義的,但研究分析師對該股票的看法也是有意義的。有相當數量的分析師在跟蹤該股票,因此了解他們對於未來發展的總體看法可能會有所幫助。
Insider Ownership Of Palomar Holdings
Palomar Holdings內部所有權
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. Company management run the business, but the CEO will answer to the board, even if he or she is a member of it.
雖然「內部人士」的明確定義具有主觀性,但幾乎所有人都認爲董事會成員是內部人士。公司管理業務,但首席執行官即使是董事會成員,也要向董事會負責。
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 report that insiders do own shares in Palomar Holdings, Inc.. 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$61m 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.
我們可以報告,內部持有Palomar Holdings股份。這是一個相當大的公司,因此看到一些潛在的重要利益一般是積極的。在這種情況下,他們持有價值約6100萬美元的股份(按當前價格計算)。 大多數人會說,這顯示了股東與董事會之間的共同利益。不過,檢查一下這些內部人士是否一直在出售可能是值得的。
General Public Ownership
一般大衆所有權
With a 10% ownership, the general public, mostly comprising of individual investors, have some degree of sway over Palomar Holdings. 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.
佔有10%股權的普通大衆,主要由個人投資者組成,對Palomar Holdings有一定程度的影響力。 雖然擁有這樣規模的股權相當可觀,但如果決定與其他大股東不一致,可能還不足以改變公司政策。
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 2 warning signs with Palomar Holdings , and understanding them should be part of your investment process.
我發現查看公司的實際所有者非常有趣。但要真正獲得深刻見解,我們也需要考慮其他信息。例如,請考慮投資風險的長期存在。我們已經發現了與Palomar Holdings相關的2個警示信號,了解它們應該是您投資過程中的一部分。
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,決定該業務所有者將獲得多大利益的是未來而非過去。因此,我們認爲最好查看此免費報告,以了解分析師是否預測更光明的未來。
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: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。
譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。