Employers Holdings, Inc.'s (NYSE:EIG) Institutional Investors Lost 4.4% Over the Past Week but Have Profited From Longer-term Gains
Employers Holdings, Inc.'s (NYSE:EIG) Institutional Investors Lost 4.4% Over the Past Week but Have Profited From Longer-term Gains
Key Insights
關鍵洞察
- Significantly high institutional ownership implies Employers Holdings' stock price is sensitive to their trading actions
- 51% of the business is held by the top 9 shareholders
- Insiders have been selling lately
- 顯著高的機構持股意味着僱主控股公司的股票價格對其交易行爲敏感
- 前9個股東持有51%的業務
- 內部人士最近一直在賣出。
Every investor in Employers Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:EIG) should be aware of the most powerful shareholder groups. The group holding the most number of shares in the company, around 83% to be precise, is institutions. Put another way, the group faces the maximum upside potential (or downside risk).
每位投資者在僱主控股公司(紐交所:EIG)中應該了解最強大的股東集團。 持有公司最多股份的集團大約佔83%,可以說是機構。 換句話說,該集團面臨着最大的上行潛力(或下行風險)。
No shareholder likes losing money on their investments, especially institutional investors who saw their holdings drop 4.4% in value last week. However, the 32% one-year return to shareholders may have helped lessen their pain. We would assume however, that they would be on the lookout for weakness in the future.
沒有股東喜歡在投資中虧損,尤其是那些上週看到其持股價值下跌4.4%的機構投資者。然而,32%的年度股東回報可能幫助減輕了他們的痛苦。不過,我們假設他們會關注未來的弱點。
In the chart below, we zoom in on the different ownership groups of Employers Holdings.
在下面的圖表中,我們詳細看看僱主控股的不同持股群體。
What Does The Institutional Ownership Tell Us About Employers Holdings?
機構持股告訴我們關於僱主控股什麼信息?
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.
許多機構的表現與近似當地市場的指數進行比較。因此,他們通常更加關注那些被納入主要指數的公司。
We can see that Employers Holdings 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. 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 Employers Holdings' historic earnings and revenue below, but keep in mind there's always more to the story.
我們可以看到僱主控股確實有機構投資者,他們持有公司股票的相當一部分。這意味着爲這些機構工作的分析師已經研究了這隻股票,並且他們喜歡它。但和其他任何人一樣,他們也可能是錯的。當多個機構擁有一隻股票時,總是存在他們處於「擁擠交易」的風險。當這樣的交易出錯時,多個參與方可能會迅速競爭出售股票。這種風險在沒有增長曆史的公司中更高。您可以在下面看到僱主控股的歷史收益和營業收入,但請記住,故事還有更多。
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 Employers Holdings. BlackRock, Inc. is currently the largest shareholder, with 14% of shares outstanding. The Vanguard Group, Inc. is the second largest shareholder owning 12% of common stock, and Dimensional Fund Advisors LP holds about 8.3% of the company stock.
由於機構投資者持有超過一半的已發行股票,董事會很可能需要關注他們的偏好。我們注意到對僱主控股公司, 對沖基金並沒有進行有意義的投資。貝萊德目前是最大的股東,持有14%的流通股。先鋒集團是第二大股東,持有12%的普通股,維度基金顧問公司持有約8.3%的公司股票。
We did some more digging and found that 9 of the top shareholders account for roughly 51% of the register, implying that along with larger shareholders, there are a few smaller shareholders, thereby balancing out each others interests somewhat.
我們進一步挖掘發現,排名前九的股東大約佔股東名冊的51%,這意味着除了較大的股東外,還有一些較小的股東,從而在一定程度上平衡了彼此的利益。
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 plenty of analysts covering the stock, so it might be worth seeing what they are forecasting, too.
研究機構的所有權是評估和篩選股票預期表現的好方法。分析師情緒的研究也可以達到同樣的效果。有很多分析師在覆蓋該股票,因此查看他們的預期可能也是值得的。
Insider Ownership Of Employers Holdings
僱主控股公司的內部人士持股情況
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 most recent data indicates that insiders own some shares in Employers 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$22m 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.
我們最新的數據表明,內部人士持有一些Employers Holdings, Inc.的股份。 這是一家相當大的公司,因此看到一些可能有意義的利益一致性通常是一個積極的跡象。在這種情況下,他們持有約2200萬美元的股份(按當前價格計算)。 大多數人會認爲這表明股東與董事會之間的利益一致性。不過,值得查看一下這些內部人士是否有在賣出股票。
General Public Ownership
公衆持股
The general public, who are usually individual investors, hold a 16% stake in Employers Holdings. While this group can't necessarily call the shots, it can certainly have a real influence on how the company is run.
普通公衆,通常是個人投資者,持有Employers Holdings 16%的股份。 雖然這一群體不一定能左右情況,但它確實可以對公司運行產生實際影響。
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. Consider risks, for instance. Every company has them, and we've spotted 1 warning sign for Employers Holdings you should know about.
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。 例如,考慮風險。每家公司都有風險,我們發現了1個關於僱主控股的警告信號,你應該了解。
If you are like me, you may want to think about whether this company will grow or shrink. Luckily, you can check this free report showing analyst forecasts for its future.
如果你像我一樣,你可能想考慮這家公司是會增長還是縮小。幸運的是,你可以查看這份免費的報告,了解分析師對其未來的預測。
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。