Institutional Investors in The Gorman-Rupp Company (NYSE:GRC) Lost 6.9% Last Week but Have Reaped the Benefits of Longer-term Growth
Institutional Investors in The Gorman-Rupp Company (NYSE:GRC) Lost 6.9% Last Week but Have Reaped the Benefits of Longer-term Growth
Key Insights
關鍵洞察
- Significantly high institutional ownership implies Gorman-Rupp's stock price is sensitive to their trading actions
- The top 8 shareholders own 51% of the company
- Insider ownership in Gorman-Rupp is 21%
- 顯著的高機構持股意味着Gorman-Rupp的股價對他們的交易行爲敏感。
- 前8大股東擁有公司51%的股份。
- Gorman-Rupp的內部持股爲21%。
To get a sense of who is truly in control of The Gorman-Rupp Company (NYSE:GRC), it is important to understand the ownership structure of the business. With 64% stake, institutions possess the maximum shares in the company. That is, the group stands to benefit the most if the stock rises (or lose the most if there is a downturn).
要了解誰真正控制Gorman-Rupp公司(紐交所:GRC),了解公司的所有權結構是很重要的。機構持有64%的股份,擁有公司最多的股票。也就是說,如果股票上漲,該群體將獲益最多(如果出現下滑,將損失最多)。
Institutional investors was the group most impacted after the company's market cap fell to US$1.1b last week. However, the 15% one-year return to shareholders might have softened the blow. We would assume however, that they would be on the lookout for weakness in the future.
機構投資者是受到影響最大的群體,因爲該公司的市值上週降至11億美元。然而,給予股東的15%一年回報可能緩和了這一打擊。我們假設,他們將觀察未來的弱點。
Let's take a closer look to see what the different types of shareholders can tell us about Gorman-Rupp.
讓我們仔細看看不同類型的股東能告訴我們關於Gorman-Rupp的事情。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Gorman-Rupp?
機構持有情況告訴我們關於Gorman-Rupp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。
Gorman-Rupp 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 Gorman-Rupp, (below). Of course, keep in mind that there are other factors to consider, too.
Gorman-Rupp已經在股票登記冊上有機構投資者。實際上,他們在公司中擁有相當可觀的股份。這意味着爲這些機構工作的分析師已經關注過這隻股票,並且他們喜歡它。但和其他人一樣,他們也可能是錯的。如果兩家大型機構投資者試圖同時賣出一隻股票,看到股價大幅下跌並不少見。因此,查看Gorman-Rupp過去的盈利軌跡是值得的(見下文)。當然,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 Gorman-Rupp. Because actions speak louder than words, we consider it a good sign when insiders own a significant stake in a company. In Gorman-Rupp's case, its Top Key Executive, Jeffrey Gorman, is the largest shareholder, holding 10% of shares outstanding. For context, the second largest shareholder holds about 9.5% of the shares outstanding, followed by an ownership of 8.3% by the third-largest shareholder.
投資者應注意,機構實際上擁有公司超過一半的股份,因此它們能夠共同施加重大影響。我們注意到對Gorman-Rupp沒有顯著投資的對沖基金。因爲行動勝於言辭,因此當公司內部人士擁有重要股份時,我們認爲這是一種好跡象。在Gorman-Rupp的案例中,其首席關鍵執行官Jeffrey Gorman是最大的股東,持有10%的流通股份。作爲背景,第二大股東持有約9.5%的流通股份,第三大股東則擁有8.3%的股份。
We also observed that the top 8 shareholders account for more than half of the share register, with a few smaller shareholders to balance the interests of the larger ones to a certain extent.
我們還觀察到,前8大股東佔據了超過一半的股份登記,幾個較小的股東在一定程度上平衡了較大股東的利益。
While studying institutional ownership for a company can add value to your research, it is also a good practice to research analyst recommendations to get a deeper understand of a stock's expected performance. There is some analyst coverage of the stock, but it could still become more well known, with time.
儘管研究公司的機構持股可以爲您的研究增加價值,但研究分析師的建議也是一個好習慣,以更深入地了解股票的預期表現。該股票有一些分析師覆蓋,但隨着時間的推移,它仍然可能變得更加知名。
Insider Ownership Of Gorman-Rupp
Gorman-Rupp的內部持股
While the precise definition of an insider can be subjective, almost everyone considers board members to be insiders. Management ultimately answers to the board. However, it is not uncommon for managers to be executive board members, especially if they are a founder or the CEO.
雖然內部人的精確定義可能是主觀的,但幾乎所有人都認爲董事會成員都是內部人。管理層最終要向董事會負責。然而,管理者成爲執行董事會成員並不罕見,尤其是在他們是創始人或首席執行官的情況下。
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 most recent data indicates that insiders own a reasonable proportion of The Gorman-Rupp Company. Insiders own US$227m worth of shares in the US$1.1b company. That's quite meaningful. Most would say this shows a good degree of alignment with shareholders, especially in a company of this size. You can click here to see if those insiders have been buying or selling.
我們最新的數據表明,內部人員持有Gorman-Rupp公司的合理比例。內部人員持有價值22700萬美元的股票,而該公司的市值爲11億美元。這非常重要。大多數人會說這顯示了與股東的高度一致,特別是在這樣一家規模的公司中。您可以點擊這裏查看這些內部人員是否有買入或賣出。
General Public Ownership
公衆持股
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 15% stake in Gorman-Rupp. While this size of ownership may not be enough to sway a policy decision in their favour, they can still make a collective impact on company policies.
公衆通常是個人投資者,持有Gorman-Rupp 15%的股份。雖然這樣的持股規模可能不足以影響政策決策,但他們仍然可以對公司政策產生集體影響。
Next Steps:
下一步:
It's always worth thinking about the different groups who own shares in a company. But to understand Gorman-Rupp better, we need to consider many other factors. For example, we've discovered 1 warning sign for Gorman-Rupp that you should be aware of before investing here.
考慮一下擁有公司股票的不同群體總是有價值的。但要更好地理解Gorman-Rupp,我們需要考慮許多其他因素。例如,我們發現Gorman-Rupp有一個警告信號,在此之前你應該意識到,在這裏投資需要注意。
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。
譯文內容由第三人軟體翻譯。