Following a 25% Decline Over Last Year, Recent Gains May Please Fulgent Genetics, Inc. (NASDAQ:FLGT) Institutional Owners
Following a 25% Decline Over Last Year, Recent Gains May Please Fulgent Genetics, Inc. (NASDAQ:FLGT) Institutional Owners
Key Insights
主要見解
- Given the large stake in the stock by institutions, Fulgent Genetics' stock price might be vulnerable to their trading decisions
- 50% of the business is held by the top 4 shareholders
- Insiders have been selling lately
- 鑑於機構在股票中所佔比例較大,fulgent genetics 的股價可能容易受到他們交易決策的影響
- 前四大股東持有公司50%的股份。
- 內部人員最近一直在賣出。
If you want to know who really controls Fulgent Genetics, Inc. (NASDAQ:FLGT), then you'll have to look at the makeup of its share registry. And the group that holds the biggest piece of the pie are institutions with 54% ownership. In other words, the group stands to gain the most (or lose the most) from their investment into the company.
如果您想知道誰真正控制着納斯達克上的 fulgent genetics 公司(股票代號:FLGT),那麼您需要查看其股權登記表的組成。 持有最大股份的是擁有54%所有權的機構。 換句話說,該機構有可能從投資公司中獲得最高回報(或者遭受最大損失)。
Institutional investors would probably welcome last week's 9.3% increase in the share price after a year of 25% losses as a sign that returns may to begin trending higher.
機構投資者可能會歡迎上週股價上漲9.3%,經歷了25%虧損一年後,表明回報可能開始上升。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Fulgent Genetics.
在下面的圖表中,我們將重點關注Fulgent Genetics的不同所有制群體。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Fulgent Genetics?
機構持股告訴我們什麼關於fulgent genetics?
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針對一個基準進行衡量,因此一旦某隻股票被納入主要指數,他們通常會更加熱衷於該股票。我們預計大多數公司都會有一些機構在登記簿上,尤其是那些正在增長的公司。
We can see that Fulgent Genetics 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 Fulgent Genetics' earnings history below. Of course, the future is what really matters.
我們可以看到fulgent genetics確實有機構投資者;他們持有公司的相當一部分股票。這意味着爲這些機構工作的分析師已經研究過這支股票並且他們喜歡它。但和其他人一樣,他們也可能出錯。如果多家機構同時改變對一支股票的看法,你可能會看到股價迅速下跌。因此,值得查看fulgent genetics的歷史營業收入。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. We note that hedge funds don't have a meaningful investment in Fulgent Genetics. The company's CEO Ming Hsieh is the largest shareholder with 29% of shares outstanding. BlackRock, Inc. is the second largest shareholder owning 13% of common stock, and The Vanguard Group, Inc. holds about 4.7% of the company stock.
機構投資者擁有公司超過50%股份,因此他們可能強烈影響董事會決策。 我們注意到對Fulgent Genetics,並沒有任何實質性的對沖基金投資。 該公司的首席執行官Ming Hsieh是最大的股東,持有29%的股份。 BlackRock, Inc.是第二大股東,持有13%的普通股,而Vanguard Group, Inc.持有約4.7%的公司股票。
To make our study more interesting, we found that the top 4 shareholders control more than half of the company which implies that this group has considerable sway over the company's decision-making.
爲了使我們的研究更有趣,我們發現前四名股東控制了公司一半以上的股份,這意味着該集團對公司的決策具有相當大的影響力。
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. There are a reasonable number of analysts covering the stock, so it might be useful to find out their aggregate view on the future.
研究機構所有權是衡量和過濾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的。由於有相當數量的分析師涵蓋這支股票,因此了解他們對未來的整體看法可能會有所幫助。
Insider Ownership Of Fulgent Genetics
fulgent genetics的內部所有權
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. 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.
公司內部人員的定義可能是主觀的,並且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,至少捕捉到董事會成員的記錄。公司管理人員向董事會報告,後者應該代表股東的利益。值得注意的是,有時高級管理人員自己也在董事會中。
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 most recent data indicates that insiders own a reasonable proportion of Fulgent Genetics, Inc.. Insiders have a US$199m stake in this US$599m business. We would say this shows alignment with shareholders, but it is worth noting that the company is still quite small; some insiders may have founded the business. You can click here to see if those insiders have been buying or selling.
我們最新的數據顯示,內部持股人持有 fulgent genetics 公司相當比例的股份。內部持股人在這家價值 59900萬美元的公司中持有 19900萬美元的股份。我們可以說這顯示了與股東的利益一致,但值得注意的是,該公司仍然相當小;一些內部持股人可能是公司的創始人。您可以 點擊這裏 查看這些內部持股人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 13% stake in the company, and hence can't easily be ignored. 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.
包括零售投資者在內的普通公衆擁有該公司13%的股份,因此不容易被忽視。儘管該公司擁有相當大的股權,但如果決策與其他大股東的決策不同步,這可能不足以改變公司政策。
Next Steps:
下一步:
While it is well worth considering the different groups that own a company, there are other factors that are even more important. Case in point: We've spotted 1 warning sign for Fulgent Genetics you should be aware of.
雖然考慮擁有公司的不同群體是值得的,但還有其他更重要的因素。舉個例子:我們發現fulgent genetics有1個警告信號,你應該注意。
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.
對這篇文章有反饋嗎?對內容感到擔憂嗎?請直接與我們聯繫。或者,發送電子郵件至editorial-team @ simplywallst.com。
Simply Wall St的這篇文章是一般性質的。我們僅基於歷史數據和分析師預測提供評論,使用公正的方法,我們的文章並非意在提供財務建議。這並不構成買入或賣出任何股票的建議,並且不考慮您的目標或財務狀況。我們旨在爲您帶來基於基礎數據驅動的長期聚焦分析。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對提及的任何股票都沒有持倉。
譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。